DOCSLIB.ORG

Dynamical Systems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dynamical Systems Dynamical Systems An LTCC course Wolfram Just and Franco Vivaldi School of Mathematical Sciences Queen Mary University of London c The University of London, 2018 Last updated: January 16, 2019 These lecture notes provide a brief introduction to some topics in dynamical systems theory, suitable for a short course. 1) Dynamical systems: continuous and discrete time. 2) Linear stability analysis and beyond: hyperbolicity, structural stability. 3) Bifurcations: what happens when a state becomes unstable. 4) Symbolic dynamics: turning orbits into strings of symbols. 5) Chaos: when the future of a deterministic system cannot be determined. The presentation is informal and hands-on. The accompanying supplementary notes by F Vivaldi provide some background material in analysis and linear algebra, and also deal with one-dimensional flows, which are not part of this course. Suggestions for further reading will be found in the last section. 1 DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS 1 1 Dynamical systems Informally, a dynamical system is a system whose states are represented by the points of a set; these states evolve with time according to a deterministic law, specified by a differential or difference equation. The system is not subjected to the effects of noise1. For instance, let us consider a single particle in one-dimension, subjected to a force. The state of this system is determined by the particle’s position and velocity; the time- evolution is governed by Newton’s law F = ma, which can be written as a pair of first- order ordinary differential equations:x ˙ = y,y˙ = F(x)/m. This law determines the state at time t provided the state at time 0 is given. This is a dynamical system on the set R2; the time is a real number. Let M be any set and f : M M be any function. Choose x0 M, and, using the → ∈ first-order difference equation xt+1 = f (xt), t > 0, define recursively an infinite sequence (x0,x1,x2,...) of elements of M. This is a dynamical system on M; the time is an integer. Definition 1.1 A dynamical system consists of a set M, called the phase space, and a one-parameter family of transformations Φt : M M such that, for all x M, → ∈ i) Φ0(x)= x; ii) Φt(Φs(x)) = Φt+s(x), for all s,t > 0. If t R (respectively, t Z), then we speak of a continuous time (respectively, discrete time) ∈ ∈ dynamical system. The family Φt is a semi-group of transformations. If ii) holds also for negative t,s, then { } we have a group, and the system is said to be invertible. The set Γ(x0)= Φt(x0),t > 0 { } is called the (forward) orbit of the point x0, called the initial condition. For discrete time dynamical systems, the set M can be quite arbitrary. For continuous time, or for systems of physical origin, M is a manifold2. For continuous time, the family of functions Φt is called a flow. 1In presence of noise, we speak of a stochastic dynamical system. 2A set that, locally, looks like Rn for some n, see page 16. 1 DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS 2 1.1 Flows We begin with some examples of continuous-time dynamical systems. Example 1.1 The harmonic oscillator. This is one of the simplest dynamical system of mathematical physics, yet a very significant one. The phase space is M = R2; the basic information is displayed below3. equations initial condition solution y x˙ = y x(0) = x x(t) = x cos(ωt)+ 0 sin(ωt) 0 0 ω 2 y˙ = ω x y(0) = y0 y(t) = ωx0 sin(ωt)+ y0 cos(ωt) − − with Φt(x0,y0)=(x(t,x0,y0),y(t,x0,y0)). The phase space space foliates into invariant ellipses. The figure on the right illustrates the geometrical meaning of the associative property ii) in definition 1.1. Φ 0 s y (x ,y ) 0 0 s Φ x t Φ s+t (x(t),y(t)) s+t The definition of a dynamical systems requires that, for any initial condition in phase space, the orbit must be unique and defined for all future times. This is not guaranteed for the solutions of a differential equationx ˙ = f (x), and so there are differential equations which cannot be regarded as dynamical systems. 3The dot denotes differentiation with respect to time. 1 DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS 3 Example 1.2 The solutions are not defined for all times. The system 2 x˙ = x x(0)= x0 (1) has solution x0 x(t,x0)= . 1 x0t − For x0 = 0, this function is not defined over the whole R. It is defined in the interval 6 ( ∞,1/x0) for x0 > 0, and (1/x0,∞) for x0 < 0. This is because the real function f (x)= x˙ − grows too rapidly near infinity, so that it is possible to reach infinity, or come back from infinity, in a finite time. Example 1.3 Lack of uniqueness. The differential equation x˙ = 2 x , with x(0)= 0 | | has two distinct solutions for t > 0,p namely x(t)= 0 and x(t)= t2. This is because the function f (x)= x˙ is not Lipschitz continuous at the equilibrium point x = 0 (the constant solution), and hence it does not vanish rapidly enough near it. So it is possible to reach the equilibrium point, or move away from it, in a finite time. To ensure uniqueness of solutions, it suffices to require that f be of class C1. Example 1.4 Forced van der Pol oscillator. x˙ = x σy x(x2 + y2) − − (2) y˙ = σx + y y(x2 + y2) γ. − − 1.5 For any value of the real parameters σ,γ, this equation defines a vector field v(z)= z˙ = 1.0 2 (x˙,y˙) in R . Plotting this vector field (here 0.5 for σ = 0.2 and γ = 0.3) gives already an 0.0 impression of the behaviour of the solutions. Dynamical systems theory is about under- -0.5 standing how the flow relates to the vector -1.0 field. -1.5 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 1 DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS 4 For special parameter values we are able to compute the flow analytically. If γ = 0, then using polar coordinates x = r cos(ϕ), y = r sin(ϕ), the equations of motion read r˙ = r r3, ϕ˙ = σ . (3) − The special solution r(t)= 0 yields the constant solution z(t)=(x(t),y(t))=(0,0) (an equilibrium point, or fixed point), while r(t)= 1, ϕ(t)= σt +ϕ(0) results in the harmonic solution z(t)=(cos(σt + ϕ(0)),sin(σt + ϕ(0)). Let T = 2π/σ. Then this solution sat- isfies z(t)= z(t + T) for all t, and we call it a periodic orbit (or a cycle), with period T. A periodic orbit of a flow is a closed non-self intersecting curve in phase space. In the present example, if σ = 0, then this periodic orbit is a so-called limit cycle, since it is 6 approached by nearby orbits —see below. For γ = 0, it is even possible to write down the general solution. The long-time behaviour of the orbits of one- and two-dimensional flows is well- understood. In one dimension, the solutions are either constant, or strictly monotonic. Indeed letx ˙ = f (x) be a smooth differential equation over R, and let x = x(t) be a non- constant solution (i.e.,x ˙(t)= f (x(t)) and f (x0) = 0). Then separation of variables yields x(t) 6 x(0) dx/ f (x)= t. Since the integral on the left-hand side is bounded (and smooth in t), we have f (x) = 0 for x [x(0),x(t)]. Because t is arbitrary, f (x(t)) does not change sign. R 6 ∈ Therefore the solution is monotonic, and hence it is either unbounded or tends to a finite limit x(t) x . It then follows by continuity that x(t)= x is a constant solution of the → ∗ ∗ differential equation. In higher dimensions, limit sets of flows can be much more complicated than fixed points, and we need a machinery to characterise this form of convergence. Let Γ(z0)= Φt(z0) : t R be the orbit of z0. { ∈ } A point w is an ω-limit point of the orbit Γ(z0) if there is a sequence (tk) of times such that lim tk = ∞ and lim Φt (z0)= w. (4) j ∞ j ∞ k → → In other words, w is an ω-limit point if for any neighbourhood U of w there is a (smallest) time t = t (U) such that Φt (z0) U. ∗ ∗ ∗ ∈ The set of all ω-limit points of Γ(z0) is called the ω-limit set of Γ(z0), denoted by ω(z0) [or ω(Γ), since this set is a property of the orbit]. By reversing the direction of time, and replacing ∞ by ∞, we obtain the analogous concept of α-limit set. − 1 DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS 5 The simplest situation occurs when limt ∞ Φt(z0)= z , where z is a fixed point. → ∗ ∗ Then, by letting tk = k and w = z in (4), we find that z ω(z0). Since there cannot be ∗ ∗ ∈ any other ω-limit point (why?), we have ω(z0)= z . { ∗} Another possibility is that ω(z0)= α(z0)= z , with z0 = z , that is, the orbit of z0 ∗ 6 ∗ approaches z in both time directions. We then say that z0 is a homoclinic point, and that ∗ Γ(z0) is a homoclinic orbit. The point z0 is heteroclinic if ω(z0)= z , and α(z0)= w ∗ ∗ where w is an equilibrium distinct from z .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 2 Structural Stability
    Chapter 2 Structural stability 2.1 Denitions and one-dimensional examples A very important notion, both from a theoretical point of view and for applications, is that of stability: the qualitative behavior should not change under small perturbations. Denition 2.1.1: A Cr map f is Cm structurally stable (with 1 m r ∞) if there exists a neighbour- hood U of f in the Cm topology such that every g ∈ U is topologically conjugated to f. Remark 2.1.1. The reason that for structural stability we just ask the existence of a topological conju- gacy with close maps is because we are interested only in the qualitative properties of the dynamics. For 1 1 R instance, the maps f(x)= 2xand g(x)= 3xhave the same qualitative dynamics over (and indeed are topologically conjugated; see below) but they cannot be C1-conjugated. Indeed, assume there is a C1- dieomorphism h: R → R such that h g = f h. Then we must have h(0) = 0 (because the origin is the unique xed point of both f and g) and 1 1 h0(0) = h0 g(0) g0(0)=(hg)0(0)=(fh)0(0) = f 0 h(0) h0(0) = h0(0); 3 2 but this implies h0(0) = 0, which is impossible. Let us begin with examples of non-structurally stable maps. 2 Example 2.1.1. For ε ∈ R let Fε: R → R given by Fε(x)=xx +ε. We have kFε F0kr = |ε| for r all r 0, and hence Fε → F0 in the C topology.
    [Show full text]
  • Writing the History of Dynamical Systems and Chaos
    Historia Mathematica 29 (2002), 273–339 doi:10.1006/hmat.2002.2351 Writing the History of Dynamical Systems and Chaos: View metadata, citation and similar papersLongue at core.ac.uk Dur´ee and Revolution, Disciplines and Cultures1 brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector David Aubin Max-Planck Institut fur¨ Wissenschaftsgeschichte, Berlin, Germany E-mail: [email protected] and Amy Dahan Dalmedico Centre national de la recherche scientifique and Centre Alexandre-Koyre,´ Paris, France E-mail: [email protected] Between the late 1960s and the beginning of the 1980s, the wide recognition that simple dynamical laws could give rise to complex behaviors was sometimes hailed as a true scientific revolution impacting several disciplines, for which a striking label was coined—“chaos.” Mathematicians quickly pointed out that the purported revolution was relying on the abstract theory of dynamical systems founded in the late 19th century by Henri Poincar´e who had already reached a similar conclusion. In this paper, we flesh out the historiographical tensions arising from these confrontations: longue-duree´ history and revolution; abstract mathematics and the use of mathematical techniques in various other domains. After reviewing the historiography of dynamical systems theory from Poincar´e to the 1960s, we highlight the pioneering work of a few individuals (Steve Smale, Edward Lorenz, David Ruelle). We then go on to discuss the nature of the chaos phenomenon, which, we argue, was a conceptual reconfiguration as
    [Show full text]
  • Structural Stability of Piecewise Smooth Systems
    STRUCTURAL STABILITY OF PIECEWISE SMOOTH SYSTEMS MIREILLE E. BROUCKE, CHARLES C. PUGH, AND SLOBODAN N. SIMIC´ † Abstract A.F. Filippov has developed a theory of dynamical systems that are governed by piecewise smooth vector fields [2]. It is mainly a local theory. In this article we concentrate on some of its global and generic aspects. We establish a generic structural stability theorem for Filip- pov systems on surfaces, which is a natural generalization of Mauricio Peixoto’s classic result [12]. We show that the generic Filippov system can be obtained from a smooth system by a process called pinching. Lastly, we give examples. Our work has precursors in an announcement by V.S. Kozlova [6] about structural stability for the case of planar Fil- ippov systems, and also the papers of Jorge Sotomayor and Jaume Llibre [8] and Marco Antonio Teixiera [17], [18]. Partially supported by NASA grant NAG-2-1039 and EPRI grant EPRI-35352- 6089.† STRUCTURAL STABILITY OF PIECEWISE SMOOTH SYSTEMS 1 1. Introduction Imagine two independently defined smooth vector fields on the 2- sphere, say X+ and X−. While a point p is in the Northern hemisphere let it move under the influence of X+, and while it is in the Southern hemisphere, let it move under the influence of X−. At the equator, make some intelligent decision about the motion of p. See Figure 1. This will give an orbit portrait on the sphere. What can it look like? Figure 1. A piecewise smooth vector field on the 2-sphere. How do perturbations affect it? How does it differ from the standard vector field case in which X+ = X−? These topics will be put in proper context and addressed in Sections 2-7.
    [Show full text]
  • Stability and Explanatory Significance of Some Simple Evolutionary Models
    Stability and Explanatory Significance of Some Simple Evolutionary Models Brian Skyrms University of California, Irvine 1. Introduction. The explanatory value of equilibrium depends on the underlying dynamics. First there are questions of dynamical stability of the equilibrium that are internal to the dynamical system in question. Is the equilibrium locally stable, so that states near to it stay near to it, or better, asymptotically stable, so that states near to it are carried to it by the dynamics? If not, we should not expect to see this equilibrium. But even if an equilibrium is asymptotically stable, that is no guarantee that the system will reach that equilibrium unless we know that the system's initial state is sufficiently close to the equilibrium. Global stability of an equilibrium, when we have it, gives the equilibrium a much more powerful explanatory role. An equilibrium is globally asymptotically stable if the dynamics carries every possible initial state in the interior of the state space to that equilibrium. If an equilibrium is globally stable, it can have explanatory value even when we are completely uncertain about the initial state of the system. Once questions of dynamical stability are answered with respect to the dynamical system in question, there is the further question of structural stability of that system itself. That is to say, are dynamical systems close to the one in question (in a sense to be made 1 precise) topologically equivalent to that system? If not, a slight mispecification of the model may make predictions that are drastically wrong. Structural stability is defined in terms of small changes in the model.
    [Show full text]
  • Stability and Bifurcation of Dynamical Systems
    STABILITY AND BIFURCATION OF DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS Scope: • To remind basic notions of Dynamical Systems and Stability Theory; • To introduce fundaments of Bifurcation Theory, and establish a link with Stability Theory; • To give an outline of the Center Manifold Method and Normal Form theory. 1 Outline: 1. General definitions 2. Fundaments of Stability Theory 3. Fundaments of Bifurcation Theory 4. Multiple bifurcations from a known path 5. The Center Manifold Method (CMM) 6. The Normal Form Theory (NFT) 2 1. GENERAL DEFINITIONS We give general definitions for a N-dimensional autonomous systems. ••• Equations of motion: x(t )= Fx ( ( t )), x ∈ »N where x are state-variables , { x} the state-space , and F the vector field . ••• Orbits: Let xS (t ) be the solution to equations which satisfies prescribed initial conditions: x S(t )= F ( x S ( t )) 0 xS (0) = x The set of all the values assumed by xS (t ) for t > 0is called an orbit of the dynamical system. Geometrically, an orbit is a curve in the phase-space, originating from x0. The set of all orbits is the phase-portrait or phase-flow . 3 ••• Classifications of orbits: Orbits are classified according to their time-behavior. Equilibrium (or fixed -) point : it is an orbit xS (t ) =: xE independent of time (represented by a point in the phase-space); Periodic orbit : it is an orbit xS (t ) =:xP (t ) such that xP(t+ T ) = x P () t , with T the period (it is a closed curve, called cycle ); Quasi-periodic orbit : it is an orbit xS (t ) =:xQ (t ) such that, given an arbitrary small ε > 0 , there exists a time τ for which xQ(t+τ ) − x Q () t ≤ ε holds for any t; (it is a curve that densely fills a ‘tubular’ space); Non-periodic orbit : orbit xS (t ) with no special properties.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamical System: an Overview Srikanth Nuthanapati* Department of Aeronautics, IIT Madras, Chennai, India
    OPEN ACCESS Freely available online s & Aero tic sp au a n c o e r e E n A g f i n Journal of o e l a e n r i r n u g o J Aeronautics & Aerospace Engineering ISSN: 2168-9792 Perspective Dynamical System: An Overview Srikanth Nuthanapati* Department of Aeronautics, IIT Madras, Chennai, India PERSPECTIVE that involved a large number of people. Knowing the trajectory is often sufficient for simple dynamical systems, but most dynamical The idea of a dynamical system emerges from Newtonian mechanics. systems are too complicated to be understood in terms of individual There, as in other natural sciences and engineering disciplines, the trajectories. The problems arise because: evolution rule of dynamical systems is an implicit relation that gives the system’s state only for a short time in the future. Finding an (a) The studied systems may only be known approximately—the orbit required sophisticated mathematical techniques and could system’s parameters may not be known precisely, or terms only be accomplished for a small class of dynamical systems prior may be missing from the equations. The approximations to the advent of computers. The task of determining the orbits of a used call the validity or relevance of numerical solutions dynamical system has been simplified thanks to numerical methods into question. To address these issues, several notions of implemented on electronic computing machines. A dynamical stability, such as Lyapunov stability or structural stability, system is a mathematical system in which a function describes the have been introduced into the study of dynamical systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Structural STABILITY MORPHOGENESIS
    1 • IMtlM" Hco_ E=~t:~'!. .. "'...-.",·Yv_ /sTRUCTURAL STABILITY and MORPHOGENESIS An Outline of a General Theory of Models Tranllated from the French edition, as updated by the author, by D. H. FOWlER U....... ".04 w ....... + Witt. 0 ForOJWOfd by C. H. WADDINGTON 197.5 (!) W. A. BENJAMIN, INC. ,,""once;;! &ook Program Reading, Mauochvsetfs I: 'I) _,...... O""MiIo .O,~c;;.,· 5,..,. lolyo J r If ! "• f• Q f iffi Enlll'" £d,,;on. 1m Orilon,l", pubh5l1ed in 19'12. • 5tdN1i1. Itruclut. t1 r'IMIfphas~oe b~ d'uroe Ihlone ghw!:,,1e des modiO'le!o bv W. A. IIMlalnln, 11><:., ',,;h.-naQ Book Pros.,m, Lib ...., or Cell lr"' Cltiliollinl! In Publication Data Them , Ren ~. 1923 - Structural stablll ty and morphogensis . 1. Btology--Mathematlcal. lIIOdels . 2 . Morphogenesis-­ Mathematical. models. 3. Topology-. I . Title. QH323 .5.T4813 574 .4'01'514 74-8829 ISBN 0-8053 -~76 -9 ISBN 0-8053 - S~?77 - 7 (pbk.) American M.,hftT1.,IQI Society (MOS) Subje<l Oassifoc"ion SdI~....., (1970); 'J2o\101Si'A2!l Copy.lllht elW5 by W. A. 1IM~IT"n . Inc. Published 1,"",1",,_sly'" CMid• • AllIt_l "JlHsned res,1t! , .... ed. mN... , I • , permIssion~::'~~:t.:~ oft""" ';:;~~~~~~~pYbllsl!e. , ~~~~~ BooIt Pros •• m, RNdinl. ~nKhuseltJ ()'867. U.S.A. END PAPERS; The hyperbolic: umbillc In hydrody... mIa : Waves . t Plum ItJllnd, M8Uachvselts. f't1oto courtesy 01 J. GLH;klnheirner. CONTENTS , FOREWORD by C. 1-1 . Waddington • • . • • • • • • • FOREWORD to the angmal French edItIO-n. by C. II . Waddington . • • • • • • • PREFACE(tran,lated from the French edition) · . xx iii TRANSLATOR'S NOTE . ... C HA PTER I.
    [Show full text]
  • A PROOF of the C1 STABILITY CONJECTURE by RICARDO MAN£
    PUBLICATIONS MATHÉMATIQUES DE L’I.H.É.S. RICARDO MAÑÉ A proof of theC1 stability conjecture Publications mathématiques de l’I.H.É.S., tome 66 (1987), p. 161-210 <http://www.numdam.org/item?id=PMIHES_1987__66__161_0> © Publications mathématiques de l’I.H.É.S., 1987, tous droits réservés. L’accès aux archives de la revue « Publications mathématiques de l’I.H.É.S. » (http:// www.ihes.fr/IHES/Publications/Publications.html) implique l’accord avec les conditions géné- rales d’utilisation (http://www.numdam.org/conditions). Toute utilisation commerciale ou im- pression systématique est constitutive d’une infraction pénale. Toute copie ou impression de ce fichier doit contenir la présente mention de copyright. Article numérisé dans le cadre du programme Numérisation de documents anciens mathématiques http://www.numdam.org/ A PROOF OF THE C1 STABILITY CONJECTURE by RICARDO MAN£ INTRODUCTION Two continuous maps, f^:X^ and f^:X^ are topologically equivalent if there exists a homeomorphism h: X^ -> X^ such that h~lf^h ==f^. A G1' diffeomorphism/ of a closed manifold M is C*" structurally stable if it has a G*" neighborhood ^ such that every g e W is topologically equivalent to /. This concept was introduced in the thirties by Andronov and Pontrjagin [I], in the limited (when compared with its present range) framework of flows on the two dimensional disk. The turning point of its development that connected it with much richer possibilities, came in the early sixties, through the work of Smale who, as a consequence of his improved version of a classical result of Birkhoff about homoclinic points, showed that structural stability can coexist with highly developed forms of recurrence [24].
    [Show full text]
  • Structurally Stable Systems Are Not Dense
    STRUCTURALLY STABLE SYSTEMS ARE NOT DENSE. By S. SMALE. In this note, we give a negative answer to "the problem of structural stability"; are the structurally stable differential equations dense in the C' topology in all (first order, ordinary, autonomous) differential equations? MAIN THEOREM. There exists a compact 4 dimensional manifold M, an open set U in the space of Cr vector fields, Cr topology, r > 0, on MI such that no X C U is structurally stable. This problem has been stated explicitly in the above form by the author on several occasions, see e. g. [10] and [11]. However the problem is older, considered for example by Soviet mathematicians, and by Peixoto who gave an affirmative answer [7] for the 2-disk and [8] for compact 2-manifolds. Evidence for a positive answer in higher dimensions was given by the author [12], [13] where it was shown that certain examples of differential equations having an infinite number of periodic solutions were structurally stable, and Anosov [2] gave further examples with the same properties. The notion of structural stability was introduced by Andronov and Pontriagin in 1937 [1] (see also Lefschetz [5]). We recall the definitions now. A differential equation (lst order, ordinary) X, will be a Cr tangent vector field on a C? manifold M, which we will assume compact for purposes of this paper. Of course X, through its solution curves, generates a 1 para- meter group of diffeomorphisms ct of M. An equivalence between differential equations X and X' on M is a homeomorphism h: 11M-->M which sends a sensed solution curve of X onto one of X'.
    [Show full text]
  • Determining the D-Dimensional Symbolic Dynamics
    spatiotemporal cats or, try herding 6 cats siminos/spatiotemp, rev. 6798: last edit by Predrag Cvitanovi´c,03/08/2019 Predrag Cvitanovi´c,Boris Gutkin, Li Han, Rana Jafari, Han Liang, and Adrien K. Saremi April 1, 2019 Contents 1 Cat map7 1.1 Adler-Weiss partition of the Thom-Arnol’d cat map.......7 1.2 Adler-Weiss partition of the Percival-Vivaldi cat map......9 1.2.1 Adler-Weiss linear code partition of the phase space... 16 1.3 Perron-Frobenius operators and periodic orbits theory of cat maps 18 1.3.1 Cat map topological zeta function............. 19 1.3.2 Adler / Adler98........................ 20 1.3.3 Percival and Vivaldi / PerViv................ 21 1.3.4 Isola / Isola90......................... 22 1.3.5 Creagh / Creagh94...................... 23 1.3.6 Keating / Keating91..................... 24 1.4 Green’s function for 1-dimensional lattice............. 25 1.5 Green’s blog.............................. 28 1.6 Z2 = D1 factorization......................... 31 1.7 Any piecewise linear map has “linear code”............ 32 1.8 Cat map blog............................. 33 References.................................. 47 1.9 Examples................................ 53 exercises 61 2 Statistical mechanics applications 67 2.1 Cat map................................ 67 2.2 New example: Arnol’d cat map................... 67 2.3 Diffusion in Hamiltonian sawtooth and cat maps......... 70 References.................................. 75 3 Spatiotemporal cat 77 3.1 Elastodynamic equilibria of 2D solids............... 79 3.2 Cats’ GHJSC16blog.......................... 80 References.................................. 94 4 Ising model in 2D 97 4.1 Ihara zeta functions.......................... 101 4.1.1 Clair / Clair14......................... 101 2 CONTENTS 4.1.2 Maillard............................ 105 4.2 Zeta functions in d=2........................
    [Show full text]
  • Structural Stability and Hyperbolic Attractors Artur Oscar Lopes
    Structural Stability and Hyperbolic Attractors Artur Oscar Lopes Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, Vol. 252. (Aug., 1979), pp. 205-219. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-9947%28197908%29252%3C205%3ASSAHA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I Transactions of the American Mathematical Society is currently published by American Mathematical Society. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/ams.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. http://www.jstor.org Wed Mar 26 16:36:54 2008 TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 252, August 1979 STRUCTURAL STABILITY AND HYPERBOLIC A'ITRACTORS BY ARTLJR OSCAR LOPES ABSTRACT.A necessary condition for structural stability is presented that in the two dimensional case means that the system has a finite number of topological attractors.
    [Show full text]
  • Structural Stability and Bifurcations
    Chapter 8 Structural Stability and Bifurcations 8.1 Smooth and Sudden Changes So far, we discussed the behavior of solutions of a dynamical system x_ = G(x); x(0) = x0; (8.1) under changes of the initial point x0. Since practical problems modelled by (8.1) can be expected to involve uncertainties in the mapping G, we should address also the question of the sensitivity of the solutions of (8.1) to perturbations of G. Then, however, we may see a very different behavior, than in the case of changes of x0. By ODE-theory, the solution of (8.1) depends continuously on the initial point, as is obvious for the solution x(t) = exp(tA)x0 of the linear problemx _ = Ax, x(0) = x0. On the other hand, small changes of the mapping G may well produce abrupt changes in the solution behavior. We saw this already in the case of the discrete logistics problem k+1 x = g(xk); k = 0; 1; 2; : : : ; g(x) := µx(1 − x); µ > 0: (8.2) Here, the fixed points are x∗ = 0 and x∗∗ = (µ − 1)/µ, where x∗ = 0 is asymptotically stable for 0 < µ < 1 and unstable for µ > 1, while x∗∗ is unstable for 0 < µ < 1 and asymptotically stable for 1 ≤ µ < 3. But, at µ = 3 the solution behavior changes significantly: In fact, for any µ > 3 the iterates tend to a 2-cycle consisting of the points 1 z± := (µ + 1) ± p(µ + 1)(µ − 3); 2µ 130 that is, the attractor consisting of the single point fx∗∗g has become an attractor-set fz+; z−g of cardinality two.
    [Show full text]