text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The nonlinear partial differential equations (NPDE) of physical interest can describe a variety of patterns, particle-like traveling solutions, solitons and breather modes in nuclear and particle physics, nonlinear molecular and solid state physics phenomena, and features found in nonlinear optics . Their solutions are usually localized and demonstrate stability in time and in collisions with each other. In the asymptotic domain these solutions consist of isolated traveling pulses that are free of interactions and have a shape related to the velocity, thus making nonlinear patterns distinct from linear results. In the scattering domain, the nonlinear solutions obey some nonlinear superposition principle. Nonlinear dynamics require NPDE which display very strong interaction between the initial conditions and the dynamics and involve multiple scales , being able to produce self-similar or fractal-like patterns. Recent examples show that the traditional nonlinear tools (inverse scattering, group symmetry, functional transforms) are not always applicable . From the experimental point of view one knows that such patterns generally have finite space-time extension and a multi-scale structure. Since the traditional solitons or the soliton-like solutions have infinite extent, one needs rather appropriate compact supported basis functions to investigate such structures.

Multi-resolution analysis (MRA), , could be a useful method for the construction of such nonlinear bases, since the linear harmonic analysis is inadequate for describing nonlinear systems. The MRA uses wavelets, which are functions that have a space-dependent scale which renders them an invaluable tool for analyzing multi-scale phenomena. Wavelets have been used in signal processing, problems involving singular potentials in quantum mechanics, in discussions concerning q-algebras, and even in nuclear structure studies . It follows that the use of MRA in the study of NPDE is natural because wavelets can analyse nonlinear features like strong variations or singularities. The NPDE describe a variety of patterns , features in quantum optics , molecular and solid state physics phenomena  and solitons in nuclear and particle physics .

In this paper, wavelet-inspired approaches for localized solutions of NPDE are explored. We propose two different formalisms for the scale analysis, and the classification of soliton solutions of NPDE. A first method provides relations between the characteristics of such solutions (amplitude, width and velocity) without the need of solving the corresponding NPDE. The method uses the multi-resolution analysis  instead of the traditional tools like the Fourier integrals or linear harmonic analysis which are inadequate for describing such systems. Moreover, the introduction of wavelet analysis in the study of NPDE is somehow natural because it can accommodate behaviour diplaying strong variations, even singularities, to a smooth behavior. This scale approach has the advantage that it does not need the explicit form of the exact solutions. Hence, it is useful especially in situations when such solutions are unknown. In section 2 we provide many examples, predictions and applications of this one-scale approximation method (OSA) for a large class of NPDE with respect to their localized solutions. The NPDE is mapped into an algebraic equation relating the amplitude, width and velocity of such signals. The results are succinctly presented in tabular form. In section 2 we show an example of the construction of a nonlinear basis for NPDE i.e. the construction of a kink-antikink basis for the K(2,2) equation, involving nonlinear dispersion. There are many physical reasons favoring wavelets in the construction of such nonlinear bases. The self-similar character of the fission process of fluid drops is an example where the same type of singularity occurs in any scale . In section 3, we use also this basis (or frame) for the investigation of the time evolution of a given initial data profile for the nonlinear-nonlinear dispersion K(2,2) equation. The proofs are introduced in two Appendices.

## 2 Scale analysis of NPDE

In this section we introduce a one-scale analysis (OSA) for the NPDE, in terms of their localized traveling solutions. The NPDE which describe physical phenomena are usually not susceptible to analytic solutions. Moreover, there are examples  when the mathematical tools like the inverse scattering theory or the transformation group method are not applicable. When phenomena of interest have many space-time scales, or the scale of the process varies in time, the numerical methods may fail, like in the case of propagating discontinuities or shock waves. A simple option is the expansion of solutions in a basis of appropriate chosen basis. The Fourier series, which has the advantage of orthogonality, cannot discriminate the local behavior of phenomena. Moreover, the analysis of the Fourier coefficients of a wave $`u(x,t)`$ is not sufficient for drawing conclusions about the scale of the localized structures.

The so called OSA analysis, described and applied here for localized traveling solutions belonging to any type of NPDE, provides algebraic connections between the width $`L`$, amplitude $`A`$, and the velocity $`V`$ of the solution, without actually solving the equation. The procedure consists in the substitution of all the terms in the NPDE, according to the rules:

$$\text{i.}u_tVu_x\text{substitution for traveling solutions},$$

$$\text{ii.}u\pm A,u_x\pm A/L,u_{xx}\pm A/L^2\mathrm{},$$
(1)
and so forth for higher order of derivatives. This substitution in eq.(1 ii) is possible only for localized (finite extended support) solutions having at least one local maximum (like solitons or Gauss functions), if they exist. The advantage of the substitution follows from the fact that it enables one to say something about the hypothetical localized traveling solutions even if (or especially when) they are not known or discovered. However, this averaging method may fail in the case of strictly monotonic solutions, or solutions with singularities. This will be made more explicit in the next paragraph and Appendix 1.

Since we are interested in traveling solutions, the first substitution reduces the number of variables from 2 to 1 so that we are now dealing with an ordinary differential equation instead of a PDE. Then, the second substitution transforms the ordinary differential equation into an equation in the parameters describing the amplitude, width and velocity. Consequently, the NPDE is mapped into an algebraic equation in $`A,L`$ and $`V`$.

The proof of the method follows from the expansion of the soliton-like solution $`u(x,t)=u(s)`$ with $`s=xVt`$, in a Gaussian family of wavelets $`\mathrm{\Psi }(s)=Ne^{Q(s)}`$, where $`Q(s)`$ is a polynomial and $`N`$ the normalization constant . If we choose $`Q=is\frac{s^2}{2}`$ we obtain a very particular wavelet with the support mainly confined in the $`(1,1)`$ interval, namely $`\mathrm{\Psi }(s)=\text{exp}[is\frac{s^2}{2}]/\pi ^{1/4}`$. We have the discrete wavelet expansion of $`u`$

$$u(s)=\underset{j}{}\underset{k}{}C_{j,k}\mathrm{\Psi }(2^jsk)=\underset{j,k}{}C_{j,k}\mathrm{\Psi }_{j,k}(s),$$
(2)
in terms of integer translations ($`k`$) of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, which provide the analysis of localization, and in terms if dyadic dilations ($`2^j`$) of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, which provide the description of different scales. The idea of the proof is to choose a point where the expansion in eq.(2) can be well approximated by one single scale such that $`u(s)`$ can be approximated with a sum of phases in $`s`$. In order to reduce the number of scales, the range of the summation should be chosen with an eye to the underlying physics. The exact proof of this approach is provided in Appendix 1.

In the following we apply this procedure to three classes of NPDE, namely: dispersive, diffusive and dispersive-diffusive nonlinear equations, and we present the results in tabular form. Before describing different examples of NPDE, we point out that for each equation we try to present one example of an exact solution (second column Tables 1,2) in comparison with the results of the much simplest OSA approach (third column of first two tables and second column of Table 3). We stress that we do not choose only that solution which fits the similarity analysis. On the contrary, our approach fits a large number of solutions, as can be checked directly.

Our first example of application of the OSA approach is given by the convective-dispersive equations, for which the most celebrated example is provided by the KdV equation

$$u_t+uu_x+u_{xxx}=0.$$
(3)
In general, the stable solutions of the nonlinear-dispersive equations are dependent of the initial conditions, through their conservation laws. Consequently, they can generate a large class of patterns, shaped by the balance between nonlinear interaction and dispersion, among which the most interesting examples are solitons, breathers and kinks.

In Table 1 we present examples of pure dispersive NPDE, identified in the first column by the form of the equation, and in the second column by a corresponding traveling localized solution, if the analytical form is available. Such exact solutions provide special relations between $`L,A`$ and $`V`$, which are given in the third column of Table 1. In the last column we introduce the results of OSA, namely the relations between these three parameters, provided by eqs.(1 ii). The usefulness of the approach may be checked, by a quick comparison between the second and the third columns. While the results in the second column are possible only when one knows the analytical solutions, the results presented in the last column, obtained by the OSA, result directly from the NPDE form, without actually solving it.

The case of the KdV equation, eq(3), is described in the first row of the Table 1. The OSA method gives a general expression for $`L=L(A,V)`$, shown in the first line, first row of the last column. In the second line of the last column we show that a specification of the relation between $`V`$ and $`A`$, together with the general result given in the first line, results in a relation between $`L`$ and $`A`$. For $`L`$ to be related to $`A`$ only, it results from the third column that the velocity $`V`$ must be proportional to $`A`$. In this case we obtain the well-known relation (first row, column two) among the parameters in the soliton solution $`V=2A`$. Moreover, OSA method allows $`V`$ to depend on a higher power of $`A`$ ($`VA^p`$, $`p1`$). If such a solution could exist, a lower bound for $`A`$ will occur. Such solitons would have only amplitudes higher than this limit, while solitons with a smaller amplitude than this limit move with velocity proportional to $`A`$.

Similar results are obtained for the MKdV equation (second row), except that here $`A`$ needs to be proportional to the square root of $`V`$ in order to have $`L`$ a function of $`A`$ only. This prediction is again identical with that in the exact solution (second column). Moreover, the same relations remain valid even for the solutions of the ”compacton” type

$$u(x,t)=\frac{\sqrt{32}k\mathrm{cos}[k(x4k^2t)]^2}{3(1\frac{2}{3}\mathrm{cos}[k(x4k^2t)]^2)},$$

where $`L=\pi /6k`$, that is $`L1/A`$, like in the Table 1.

Next example (third row) is provided by a generalised KdV equation, in which the dispersion term is quadratic

$$u_t+(u^2)_x+(u^2)_{xxx}=0.$$
(4)
Eq.(4), known as K(2,2) equation because of the two quadratic terms, admits compact supported traveling solutions, named compactons . In general, the compactons are obtained in the form of a power of some trigonometric function defined only on its half-period, and zero otherwise, in such a way that the solution is enough smooth for the NPDE in discussion. In the above example the square of the solution has to be continuous up to its third derivative with respect to $`x`$.

Different from solitons, the compacton width is independent of the amplitude and this fact provides the special connection with the wavelet bases. The compactons are characterize by a unique scale, and it is this feature that makes it possible to introduce a nonlinear basis starting from a unique generic function. For eq.(4) the compacton solution is given by

$`\eta _c(xVt)={\displaystyle \frac{4V}{3}}cos^2\left[{\displaystyle \frac{xVt}{4}}\right],`$ (5)
if $`|xVt|<2\pi `$ and zero otherwise. Here we notice that the velocity is proportional to the amplitude and the width of the wave is independent of the amplitude, $`L=4`$. As a field of application we mention that the quadratic dispersion term is characteristic for the dynamics of a chain with nonlinear coupling.

The general compacton solution for eq.(4) is actually a ”dilated” version of eq.(5). That is, a combination of the first rising half of the squared cos in eq.(5), followed by a flat domain of arbitrary length $`\lambda `$, and finally followed by the second, descending part of eq.(5). Actually, this combination is just a kink compacton joined smoothly with an antikink one

$$\eta _{kak}(xVt;\lambda )=\{\begin{array}{cc}0\mathrm{}\hfill & \\ \frac{4V}{3}cos^2\left[\frac{xVt}{4}\right],2\pi xVt0\hfill & \\ \frac{4V}{3},0xVt\lambda \hfill & \\ \frac{4V}{3}cos^2\left[\frac{xVt\lambda }{4}\right],\lambda xVt\lambda +2\pi \hfill & \\ 0\mathrm{}\hfill & \end{array}$$
(6)
In Fig. 1 we present compactons (upper line), kink-antikink pairs (KAK) described by eq.(6), both with the same amplitude and velocity (middle line). Although the second derivative of this generalized compacton is discontinuous at its edges, the KAK, eq.(6), is still a solution of eq.(4) because the third derivative acts on $`u^2`$, which is a function of class $`C_3`$. Finally, we can construct solutions by placing a compacton on the top of a KAK, as in the bottom line of Fig. 1. Such a solution exists only for a short interval of time ($`\lambda /V`$), since the two structures have different velocities. The analytic expression of the solution is given by

$$\eta (x,t)=\eta _{kak}(xVt;\lambda )+\left(\eta _c(xV^{}t2\pi )+\frac{4V}{3}\right)\chi (\frac{xV^{}t2\pi }{2\pi }),$$
(7)
for $`0<t<(\lambda 4\pi )/(V^{}V)`$ and zero in the rest. Here $`\chi (x)`$ is the support function, equal with 1 for $`|x|1`$ and 0 in the rest, and $`V^{}=3\text{max}\{\eta _c\}/4+2V`$.

For the K(2,2) compacton eq.(5) fulfills some relations between the parameters: $`A=4V/3`$ and $`L=4`$ . The relations provided by OSA in the last column of the third row, predict such relations, and hence also proove the existence of the compacton. That is, for a linear relation between the amplitude and the speed, the half-width is constant and does not depend on $`A`$. Indeed, if we choose $`V=\pm 3A/2`$ or $`V=\pm 5A/2`$, we obtain $`L=4`$, like for the compacton. The constant value of $`LL_0=const.`$ is a typical feature of the K(2,2) compactons. Moreover, it was found numerically that for any compact supported initial data, wider than $`L_0`$, the solution decomposes in time into a series of $`L_0`$ compactons, Fig. 2. For narrower initial data the numeric solution blows up. There is no exact or analytic explanation of this effect, so far. The scale relations can give a hint in this situation, too, by using the graph of the relation $`L=L(V,A)`$ provided by this qualitative method. In Fig. 3, $`L`$ from the third column of the third row is plotted versus $`V`$, for several values of $`A`$ (larger values of $`A`$ translate the curves to the right). Above the value $`L=4`$ of the half-width of a stable compacton, wider compact pulses produce an intersection for each curve (each $`A`$) with the axis $`L=4`$, providing a series of compactons of different heights, like in the numerical experiments described in . Below the $`L=4`$ line, all the curves $`L(V)`$ approach $`L=0`$, towards infinite amplitude, explaining the instability of the narrower initial data.

Another good example of the predictive power of the method is exemplified in the case of a general convection-nonlinear dispersion equations, denoted by K(n,m)

$$\eta _t+(\eta ^n)_x+(\eta ^m)_{xxx}=0.$$
(8)
Compacton solution for any $`nm`$ are not known in general, except for some particular cases. In this case we find a general relation among the parameters, for any $`n,m`$, shown in the fourth and fifth rows. These general relations $`L(A,V)`$ approach the known relations for the exact solutions, in the particular cases like $`n=m`$ (fourth row), $`n=m=2`$ (third row), $`n=m=3`$ (first reference in ) and $`n=3,m=2`$; $`n=2,m=3`$ (fifth row). These results can be used to predict the behavior of solutions for all values of $`n,m`$.

In the following, we present another example of applications of the OSA approach, related to a new type of behavior of nonlinear systems. Traditional solitons move with constant speed on a rectilinear path (except for the roton  which has a circular trajectory with constant angular velocity). The speed is usually equal to the amplitude scaled with a constant. Higher solitons travel faster and there are no solitons at rest (zero speed implies zero amplitude). They can travel in both directions with opposite signs for the amplitude. The situation is different in the case of compactons, which allow also stationary solutions. When linear and nonlinear disspersion occur simultaneously, like in the so called K(2,1,2) equation

$$u_t+(u^2)_x+(u)_{xxx}+ϵ(u^2)_{xxx}=0,$$

where $`ϵ`$ is a control parameter, the OSA yields a dependence of the form

$$L=\sqrt{(\pm A+ϵ)/(V\pm A)},$$

which still provides a constant width if $`V=\pm A+2ϵ`$. In this case, the speed is proportional to the amplitude, but can change its sign even at non-zero amplitude. Solutions with larger amplitude than a critical one ($`A_{crit}=2ϵ`$) move to the right, solutions having the critical amplitude are at rest, and solutions smaller than the critical amplitude move to the left. This behavior was explored in , too. However, such a switching of the speed is not necessarily a feature of the nonlinear dispersion. A compacton of amplitude $`A`$ on the top of a infinite-length KAK solution of amplitude $`\delta `$

$$u(x,t)=Acos^2\left(\frac{xVt}{4}\right)+\delta ,$$
(9)
is still a solution of the K(2,2) equation, with the velocity given by $`V=\frac{3}{4}\left(2\delta +A\right)`$. For $`A=2\delta `$ the solution becomes an anti-compacton moving together with the KAK. In the case of a slow-scale time-dependent amplitude the oscillations in amplitude can transform into oscillations in the velocity. The key to such a conversion of oscillations is the coupling between the traditional nonlinear picture (convection-dispersion-diffusion) and the typical Schrödinger terms.

In Table 2 we present another class of NPDE, namely the dissipative ones. These equations generalize the linear wave equation (first row) where there is no typical length of the traveling solutions. The wavelet analysis provides the correct expression for the dispersion relation ($`V=c`$ $``$ $`k^2=\omega ^2/c^2`$) with no constraint on either the amplitude $`A`$ or on the width $`L`$.

In the second row we introduce the celebrated Burgers equation which represents the simplest model for the convective-dissipative interaction. Dissipative systems are to a large extent indifferent to how they were initialized, and follow their own intrinsic dynamics. We provide in the second column an analytic solution of the Burgers equation. For some special of values of the integration constants ($`2C<V^2`$, $`D=0`$) the solution becomes a traveling kink

$$u(x,t)=V+\sqrt{V^22C}\text{tanh}[\sqrt{V^22C}(xVt)].$$
(10)
By applying the OSA approach to the Burger equation (third column) we obtain the same relation between amplitude and half-width, like in the case of the exact solution eq.(10), providing the velocity is proportional with the amplitude.

In the following we apply the OSA approach to investigate a nonlinear Burgers equation

$$u_t+a(u^m)_x\mu (u^k)_{xx}+cu^\gamma =0,$$
(11)
called quasi-linear parabolic equation , and used to describe the flow of fluids in porous media or the transport of thermal energy in plasma. The last term describes the volumetric absorption (Bremsstrahlung for $`\gamma =1/2`$, synchrotron radiation for $`\gamma `$ in the range $`1.52`$, etc). The second term in eq.(11) describes the convection process and the coefficient $`\beta `$ ranges from 0 to 1 in the case of difussion in plasma, and further to higher values, for unsaturated porous medium in the presence of gravity. The existence and stability of waves or patterns is strongly dependent on the coefficients $`a,\mu ,c,m,k`$ and $`\gamma `$, and at this point the OSA can be useful again since there is no general analytic solution for eq.(11). The result of the OSA approach is presented in the third row of Table 2. The typical scale of patterns depends on the parameters in the equations and the amplitude of the excitations, in a complicated way.

However, in order to test OSA again, we found a simple class of exact solutions when $`c=0`$, presented in the fourt row in Table 2, and expressed as the inverse of a degenerated hypergeometric function. In this expression we have $`𝒜=\mu kV^{\alpha 1}((k1)a^\alpha )^1`$, $`z=(a/V)u^{m1}`$ and $`\alpha =(k1)/(m1)`$. The asymptotic behavior of the left hand side of the solution given in fourth row, second column, is described by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +1)\left[(1)^\alpha +\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha )}z^{\alpha 1}e^\alpha \right]+𝒪(1/z).$$

If $`z`$ approaches $`+\mathrm{}`$ the solution increases indefinitely like an exponential. For $`\alpha >1`$ (strong difussion effects), for even $`k`$ and for even $`m`$, the traveling wave $`u(xVt)`$ has a negative singularity towards $`\mathrm{}`$ at $`x+x_0=\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +1)(1)^\alpha <0`$. For $`k`$ odd there is also a singularity at $`x+x_0>0`$. These solutions are not likely to provide viable physical results. If $`k`$ is even and $`m`$ is odd (the singularity is pushed towards imaginary $`x`$), or if $`0<\alpha <1`$, the singularity is eliminated and the solution becomes semi-bounded, like in the particular situations investigated in the article . In this case, OSA provides again the correct relations, since we obtaine the special behavior of the solution if the velocity is proportional to the power $`m1`$ of the amplitude $`A`$. Also, we predict the space scale of these semi-compact pulses, namely the length $`L=\frac{\mu k^2A^{k1}}{V\pm amA^{m1}}`$ .

The OSA analysis can be applied in the case of sine-Gordon equation, fifth row of Table 2. The solutions with the velocity proportional with $`L^2`$ are characterized through the OSA approach by a transcendental equation in $`A`$, identical with the equation fulfilled by the amplitude $`A`$ of the exact sine-Gordon soliton.

In the sixth row, we present the cubic nonlinear Schrödinger equation (NLS3) which has a soliton solution. This type of equation is applied in nonlinear optics, elementary particle physics or in the polaron model in solid state physics . Recently, different effects of cluster physics could be explained by using the NLS3 equation. In the sixth row of Table 2 we present the NLS3 equation together with its one soliton solution of amplitude $`\eta _0`$, obtained by the inverse scattering method. In the last column we also show the relation between the parameters of a localized solution, obtained by OSA. The equation for $`L(A,V)`$ is more general than that one fulfilled by the soliton, and hence is related to more general localized solutions. By choosing the velocity proportional to the amplitude, we reobtain the $`L1/A=1/\eta _01/V`$ typical relations for the soliton given in the second column. If a more general solution of the NLS3 equation describes, for example, the dynamics of some cluster states, or the dynamics of hard spheres in a hard core potential model

$$\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\mathrm{\Psi }_{xx}+(EV)\mathrm{\Psi }+a\mathrm{\Psi }^3=0,$$

then the $`L`$ parameter gives an estimation for the wavelength of the wavefunctions, or for the correlation length in a Bose model

$$L=\frac{\mathrm{}}{\sqrt{2m(EV)+aA^2}}\frac{\mathrm{}}{\sqrt{2m(EV)}}\text{for small }A.$$

For the general case of a NLS equation of order $`n`$ (seventh row), where a general analytical solution is unknown, the method predicts a special $`L=L(A,V)`$ dependence, shown in the third column and in Fig. 4. Contrary to third order NLS, where the dependence of $`L`$ with $`A`$ is monotonous for $`V=\pm A`$ ($`n=3`$ in Fig. 4), at higher orders than 3, the $`L(A)`$ function has discontinuities in the first derivative. This wiggle of the function (Fig. 4, $`n=4`$) holds at a critical width, possibly producing bifurcations in the solutions and scales. As a consequence, initial data close to this width can split into doublet (or even triplet, for higher order NLS) solutions, with different amplitudes. Such phenomena have been put into evidence in several numerical experiments for quintic nonlinear equations .

The final example of Table 2 is provided by the Gross-Pitaevski (GP) mean field equation, which is used to describe the dilute Bose condensate . The scalar field (or order parameter) governed by this equation was shown to behave in a particle manner, too, since it can contain topological deffects, namely dark solitons. The space scale $`L`$ of such solutions is important, for both the theory and experiment, since is related to the trap dimensions and to the scattering length. In the last row of the Table 2 we give one particular solution of a simplified one-dimensional version of the GP equation

$$i\mathrm{}\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }(\stackrel{}{x},t)}{t}=\left(\frac{\mathrm{}^2\mathrm{}}{2m}+V_{ext}(\stackrel{}{r})+\frac{4\pi \mathrm{}^2a}{m}|\mathrm{\Psi }(\stackrel{}{x},t)|^2\right)\mathrm{\Psi }(\stackrel{}{x},t),$$
(12)
where $`a`$ is the s-wave scattering length and $`V_{ext}`$ is the confining potential. In the solution provided in the table, the half-width of the exact nonstationary solution is $`L=1/\sqrt{v_c^2p^2}`$, where $`v_c`$ is the Landau critical velocity, and $`p=\dot{q}(t)`$ is the momentum associated with the motion of this disturbance. It is easy to check that the OSA provides a good match with this exact solution, and also $`L`$ fits the correlation length $`l_0=\sqrt{m/4\pi \mathrm{}^2a}`$. We stress that such estimation of the length is also important in nuclear physics where one can explain the fragmentation process as a bosonization in $`\alpha `$-particles, inside the nucleus. Such systems are coherent if the wavelength associated with the cluster (the resulting $`L`$ in the GP equation) is comparable with the distance between the $`\alpha `$-clusters.

The more complex the NPDE is, the richer the conclusions of the OSA approach. A good example of such an analysis is related to the convective-dissipative-dispersive NPDE, example provided by the model equation

$$u_t+a(u^m)_x+b(u^k)_{xx}+c(u^n)_{xxx}=0$$
(13)
Here $`m,k`$ and $`n`$ are integers and the corresponding terms are responsible of the nonlinear interaction (convective term), dissipation and dispersion . The above equation is related to weakly nonlinear phenomena, and it occurs in modeling porous medium, magma, interfacial phenomena in fluids (and hence applications to drop physics), etc. General solutions are difficult to obtain for such a complex equation. We show in the following that most of the essential conclusions for the behavior of its solutions can be obtain, in a simple way, by the OSA. This approach maps this equation into

$$(amA^{m1}V)L^2\mu k^2A^{k1}L+n^3A^{n1}=0,$$
(14)
Table 3, first row. The most symmetric case is obtained when either $`V=0`$ (stationary patterns) or $`VA^{m1}`$. In this situation the condition to have a monotonous dependence of $`L`$ as a function of $`A`$ is $`2k=m+n`$ which yields a scale structure

$$L=A^{km}\left(\frac{\mu k^2\pm \sqrt{\mu ^2k^44mn^3(aV_0)}}{2m(aV_0)}\right)A^{km},$$
(15)
where we put $`V=mV_0A^{m1}`$. The condition $`2k=m+n`$ is just the condition obtained in  from a scaling approach. This condition assures the universality of the corresponding patterns, and it is the unique case in which $`L`$ depends on a power of $`A`$. In any other situation, this dependence is more complicated and introduces singularities which broke the self-similarity. In the above cited paper, the author finds out the condition for mass invariance at scaling transformations as $`m=n+2=k+1`$. In our case we just have to request the product $`AL`$ (which gives a measure of the mass, or volume of the pattern, like in the case of one-dimensional solitons) to be a constant. This gives the condition $`km+1=0`$ which, together with the general invariance condition $`2k=m+n`$, reproduces $`m=n+2=k+1`$. In this case we have patterns characterized by a width

$$L=\frac{\mu k^2\pm \sqrt{\mu ^2k^44mn^3(aV_0)}}{2mA(aV_0)}n^3/A\mu k^2.$$

If $`aV_0`$ the width approaches $`n^3/A\mu k^2`$. In order to make $`L`$ independen of $`A`$, like in the compacton case, we need $`m=k`$, which together with the first invariance condition $`2k=m+n`$, yields $`m=n=k`$. This is the exceptional case when the dissipative and dispersive processes have the same scaling, resulting form the invariance of the eq.(13) under the group of scales. Finaly, if we choose $`LV`$ we obtain the condition $`k+1=2m`$ which (together with $`2k=m+n`$) is the condition for spiral symmetry and occurence of similarity structures .

The above comments are not intended to be a complete study of such a complex equation, but the just a proof of how many conclusions one can obtain from the simple equation in $`A,L`$ and $`V`$, eq.(14).

The next example is provided by one of the most generalized KdV equation, which is generated from the Lagrangian

$$(n,l,m,p)=\left[\frac{\varphi _x\varphi _t}{2}+\alpha \frac{(\varphi _x)^{p+2}}{(p+1)(p+2)}\beta (\varphi _x)^m(\varphi _{xx})^2+\frac{\gamma }{2}(\varphi _x)^n(\varphi _{xx})^l(\varphi _{xxx})^2\right],$$
(16)
where $`\alpha ,\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$ are parameters adjusting the relative strentgh of the interactions, and $`n,l,m,p`$ are integers. For example, for $`\gamma =0`$ one re-obtains the K(2,2) equation, and for $`\gamma =m=0,p=1`$ one obtains the KdV equation. The associated Euler-Lagrange equation in the function $`\varphi _x=u(x,t)u(xVt)=u(y)`$, reads after one integration

$$Vu=\frac{\alpha }{p+1}u^{p+1}\beta mu^{m1}(u_y)^2+2\beta (u^mu_y)_y+\frac{\gamma n}{2}u^{n1}(u_y)^l(u_{yy})^2$$

$$\frac{\gamma l}{2}(u^n(u_y)^{l1}(u_{yy})^2)_y+\gamma (u^n(u_y)^lu_{yy})_{yy}+C,$$
(17)
where $`C`$ is the integration constant. By using the OSA we obtain the following important result, expressed in the second row of Table 3: The unique case when such an equation allows compact supported traveling solutions is when $`m=p=n+r`$, $`C=0`$ and $`V=V_0A^m`$. This result is in full agrement with the variational calculation in .

Both eqs.(13) and (17) are rather more qualitative than capable of modeling measurable phenomena. That is why we introduce now a more general model equation, in the form

$$u_t+f(u)_x+g(u)_{xx}+h(u)_{xxx}=0,$$
(18)
where $`f,g`$ and $`h`$ are differentiable functions of the the function $`u(x,t)`$ itself. The OSA approach gives the equation

$$V+f^{}(A)+\frac{Ag^{\prime \prime }(A)+g^{}(A)}{L}+\frac{A^2h^{\prime \prime \prime }(A)+3Ah^{\prime \prime }(A)+h^{}(A)}{L^2}=0.$$
(19)
A general analysis of eq.(19) is difficult, and the best ways are numerical investigations obtained for particular choices of the three functions. We confine ourselves here only to show that the class of solutions which have similarity properties are those for which $`V=V_0f^{}(A)`$. In this case eq.(19) can be reduced to

$$L^2f^{}(1V_0)+L(Ag^{\prime \prime }+g^{})+A^2h^{\prime \prime \prime }+3Ah^{\prime \prime }+h^{}=0,$$
(20)
case which is presented in the third row of Table 3. This last relation can be used for different purposes. For example, given a certain type of dispersion and difusion ($`g,h`$ fixed), we can estimate for what types of nonlinearity ($`f`$) the width $`L`$ will have a given dependence with $`A`$. Or, if we know for instance $`f(u)=f_0u^{q_1}`$ and $`h(u)=h_0u^{q_2}`$, we can ask what type of diffusion $`g`$ we need, to have constant scale (width) of the patterns (waves), no matter of the magnitude of the amplitude $`A`$. In other words, which is the compatible diffusion term, for given nonlinearity-dispersion terms, which provides fixed scale solutions. The result is obtained by integration eq.(20) with respect to $`g(u)`$

$$g(u)=\frac{h_0}{L}\left(1+q_2+\frac{1}{q_21}\right)u^{q_2}\frac{Lf_0(1V_0)}{q_11}u^{q_1}+C_3\text{Log}u+C_4,$$
(21)
where $`C_{3,4}`$ are constants of integration. In a similar way one can check the existence of different other configurations by solving eq.(20), or more general, eq.(19).

A last application of this method, occurs if the KdV equation has an additional term depending on the square of the curvature

$$u_t+uu_x+u_{xxx}+ϵ(u_{xx}^2)_x=0.$$
(22)
This is the case for extremely sharp surfaces (surface waves in solids or granular materials) when the hydrodynamic surface pressure cannot be linearized in curvature. Such a new term yields a new type of localized solution fulfilling the relations

$$L=\sqrt{\frac{4ϵA}{\pm \sqrt{18ϵA(A\pm V)}1}}.$$

If we look for a constant half-width solution (compacton of $`1/L=\alpha `$) we need a dependence of velocity of the form $`V=(1+\alpha ^2ϵ/8)A+1/8ϵA+\alpha /4`$. There are many new effects in this situation. The non-monoton dependence of the speed on $`A`$ introduces again bifurcations of a unique pulse in dublets and triplets. Also, there is an upper bound for the amplitude at some critical values of the width. Pulses narrower than this critical width drop to zero. Such bumps can exist in pairs of identical amplitude at different widths. They may be related with the recent observed ”oscillations” in granular materials .

The examples presented in Tables 1-3 prove that the above method provides a reliable criterion for finding compact suported solutions. The reason this simple prescription works in so many cases follows from the advantages of wavelet analysis on localized solutions. We stress that this method has little to do with the traditional similarity (dimensional) analysis . In the latter case one obtains relations among powers of $`A,L`$ and $`V`$, not relations with numeric coefficients like those found in our method.

## 3 The frame of KAK pairs

In the following we investigate the posibility of construction of a nonlinear frame (an over determined or incomplete basis) by using some compact solutions of the K(2,2) equation. The high stability against scattering of the K(2,2) compactons, or compacton generation from compact initial data, suggest they may play the role of a nonlinear local basis. We know from many numerical experiments , that any positive compact initial data decomposes into a finite series of compactons and anticompactons. This suggests that an intrinsic ingredient for a nonlinear basis could be the multiresolution structure of the solutions, similar with the structure of scaling functions in wavelet theory.

The compactons given in eqs.(5,6) have constant half-width and hence describe a unique scale, which can cover all the space by integer translations. From the point of view of multi-resolution analysis, the K(2,2) equations act like a $`L`$-band filter, allowing only a particular scale to emerge for any given set of initial condition. To each scale, from zero to infinity, we can associate a K(2,2) equation with different coefficients. However, the compacton solution is not the unique one with this property. For a given K(2,2) equation, we can thus extend the scale from $`L`$ to any larger scale. These more general compact supported solutions are still $`C_2(𝐑)`$ and are combinations of piece-wise constant and piece-wise $`\mathrm{cos}^2`$ functions. The simplest shape is given by a half-compacton prolonged with a constant level, that is a kink solution. The basis solution is a kink-antikink (KAK) compact supported combination, Fig. 1. Such kink-antikink pairs of different length, can be associated with other compactons, or KAK pairs, one on the top of the other

$$\eta _{comp+KAK}(xVt;\lambda )=\{\begin{array}{cc}0\mathrm{}\hfill & \\ \frac{4V}{3}cos^2\left[\frac{xVt}{4}\right],2\pi xVt0\hfill & \\ \frac{4V}{3},0xVt\delta \hfill & \\ \frac{4V}{3}+\frac{4}{3}(V^{}2V)cos^2\left[\frac{xV^{}t}{4}\right],\delta xVt\delta +4\pi \hfill & \\ \frac{4V}{3},\delta +4\pi xVt\lambda \hfill & \\ \frac{4V}{3}cos^2\left[\frac{xVt\lambda }{4}\right],\lambda xVt\lambda +2\pi \hfill & \\ 0\mathrm{}\hfill & \end{array}$$
(23)
where $`\delta <\lambda `$ characterizes the initial position (at $`t=0`$) of the top compacton, with respect to the flat part of the KAK solution. The amplitude $`4(V^{}2V)/3`$ of the compacton, and the amplitude $`4V/3`$ of the KAK, are related to their velocities $`V^{}`$ and $`V`$, respectively. The length of the flat part, $`\lambda `$, is arbitrary. A compound solution is not stable in time since the different elements travel with different velocities. The total height of the compacton is $`4(V^{}V)/3`$. Since the higher the amplitude is, the faster the structure travels, the top compacton moves faster than the KAK, and at a certain moment it passes the KAK. Because the area of the solution is conserving, such a compound structure decomposes into compactons and KAK pairs. Similar and even more complicated constructions can be imagined, with indefinite number of compactons and KAK’s, if one just fulfills the $`C_3`$ continuity condition for the square of the total structure. Such structures, defined at the initial moment can interpolate any function, playing a similar role with wavelets or spline bases. It has been also proved that the KAK solutions are stable, by using both a linear stability analysis and Lyapunov stability criteria.

For a given K(2,2) equation, the compacton solution, eq.(5) and in addition the family of KAK solutions, eq.(6) can be organized as a scaling functions system. They act like a low-pass filter in terms of space-time scales and give the opportunity to construct frames of functions from the wavelet model .

With the notation from Appendix 2, and from eq.(32), we have the elements of the frame

$$\eta _{k,j}(x)=\eta _{kak}(\pi (x2^jVtk),2^j1)|_{t=0},$$

where $`t=0`$ means that we neglect the time evolution, but the amplitude is still amplified with a factor of $`2^j`$, in virtue of relation $`\eta _{max}=4V/3`$. We can now expand any initial data for the K(2,2) equation in this frame

$$u_0(x)=\underset{k}{}\underset{j}{}C_{k,j}\eta _{k,j}(x),$$
(24)
and taking into account that

$$\eta _{k,j}\eta _{k^{},j^{}}\{\begin{array}{cc}0\hfill & k^{}=k2^{j^{}j},\mathrm{},(k+1)2^{j^{}j}1\hfill \\ =0\hfill & \text{otherwise,}\hfill \end{array}$$
(25)
we can show that the square of the initial data can be linearized by

$$u^2(x)=\underset{k,j}{}\underset{j^{}j}{}\underset{k^{}I}{}C_{k,j}C_{k^{},j^{}}$$

$$\times \left(\underset{i_1=0}{\overset{1}{}}\underset{i_2=0}{\overset{1}{}}\mathrm{}\underset{i_{j^{}j}=0}{\overset{1}{}}\eta _{\sigma (i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_{j^{}j}),j^{}}\right)\eta _{k^{},j^{}},$$
(26)
where $`I`$ is the range of $`k^{}`$ described in the first line of eq. (25), and

$$\sigma (i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_{j^{}j})=\underset{l=1}{\overset{j^{}j}{}}i_l2^{j^{}j^{}l+\frac{(j^{}j)(j^{}j+1)l(l+1)}{2}}$$

$$+k2^{(j^{}j)j+\frac{(j^{}j)(j^{}j+1)}{2}}.$$
(27)
From this relation and from eq.(25) we notice that in eq.(27) the unique nonzero terms are those for which $`\sigma (i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_{j^{}j})=k^{}`$ with $`k^{}I`$. Hence the initial data is expanded in different scales at different translations. The translations are mutually orthogonal so they do not give a contribution to the square. In the multiplication of two different scales in the expression of the square, we reduce the wider scale in terms of linear combination of the narrower ones, by using the two-scale equation, eq.(31) in Appendix 2. All the nonzero terms in this product are of the order $`(2^j1)/(2^j^{}1)2^{j^{}j}`$. This number, given by the number of solutions of the equations $`\sigma (i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_{j^{}j})=k^{}`$, with $`k^{}I`$, is much smaller than the initial number of terms, where from the advantage of the frame. This is the advantage of treating nonlinear problems with a basis that has a scale criterion.

Another application of the KAK basis occurs when one needs to understand the dynamics of the initial data for the K(2,2) equation. Many numerical simulations show that in the case when the width of the initial data is larger that $`L_{compacton}`$, the initial shape decomposes into a finite number of compactons having the same width and different amplitudes . If we take such an initial pulse, Fig. 5a, and we want to see its time evolution untill the break up process, we have first to expand it into the KAK frame, Fig. 5a. Then we just let the system develope and the different KAK’s move with their correspon velocity, eq.(23), providing the new shapes, Fig. 5b and 5c, at different moments. We notice a good agreement between these theoretical calculation and the above quoted numerical experiments. At this stage we can not yet predict the way that the KAK breaks back into compactons. However, we notice that the area of such structures in the phase space is the Poincare invariant and should give a hint towards the breaking process. This invariant is nothing that the $`u^3`$ (denoted $`D_2`$ invariant in ) invariant of the K(2,2) equation.

## 4 Comments and conclusions

First, we make a general statement concerning the compact solutions of one-dimensional NPDE. A one-dimensional dynamical model is described by a general NPDE equation $`_tu=𝒪(x,_x)u`$ where $`𝒪`$ is a nonlinear differential operator. By taking into account only traveling solutions, this NPDE reduces to a nonlinear ordinary differential equation in the coordinate $`y=xVt`$ for an arbitrary velocity $`V`$. If $`u(y)`$ is a compact supported solution it follows that it is not unique with respect to fixed initial compact data. Indeed, if we choose the initial data such that the function and its derivatives (up to the requested order) are zero in the neighborhood of a certain point $`y_0`$ of the $`y`$ axis, these conditions can be fulfilled by any translated version of a compact supported particular solution, placed everywhere on the axis outside this neighborhood. Consequently, for such initial data, the solution is not unique. This result shows that the compact supported property of the initial data and of the solution implies its non-uniqueness.

Since we can transform the NODE into a nonlinear differential system of order one

$$\stackrel{}{U}_y=\stackrel{}{F}(y,\stackrel{}{U}),\stackrel{}{U}=(u,u_y,\mathrm{}),$$
(28)
we can apply the fundamental theorem of existence and uniqueness to solutions of eq.(28), for given initial data $`\stackrel{}{U}(y_0)=\stackrel{}{U}_0`$. If the function $`\stackrel{}{F}`$ in eq.(28) fulfills the Lipschitz condition (its relative variation is bounded) than, for any initial condition, the solution is unique . Since any linear function is analytic and hence Lipschitz, we conclude that only nonlinear functions $`\stackrel{}{F}`$ allow the existence of compact supported solutions. Thus, a compact soliton implies non-uniqueness in the underlying NPDE, which implies non-Lipschitzian structure of the NPDE and hence the existence of nonlinear terms.

In this paper we introduce new physical applications for wavelets, that is the study of localized solutions of nonlinear partial differential equations. The existence of compactons underlines a common feature of NPDE, discrete wavelets, and also finite differences equations. We propose a new scale approach for the similarity analysis and clasiffication of soliton solutions, without the need of solving the corresponding NPDE. Also, we proved that starting from any unique soliton solution of a NPDE, we can construct a frame of solutions organized under a multiresolution criterium. This approach provides the possibility of constructing a nonlinear basis for NPDE. We show that frames of self-similar functions are related with solitons with compact support. In addition, we notice the evidence that compactons fulfil both characteristics of solitons and wavelets, suggesting possible new applications. Such a unifying direction between nonlinearity and self-similarity, can bring new applications of wavelets in cluster formation, at any scale, from supernovae through fluid dynamics to atomic and nuclear systems. The scale approach can be applied with success to the physics of droplets, bubbles, patterns, fragmentation, fission and fusion.

Supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation through a regular grant, No. 9970769, and a Cooperative Agreement, No. EPS-9720652, that includes matching from the Louisiana Board of Regents Support Fund.

## 5 Appendices

### 5.1 Appendix 1

We base our proof on the similar proposition in , excepting that here we use Gaussian filtering instead of Morlet. We start form the the discrete wavelet expansion of the signal $`u(s)`$ given in eq.(2)

$$u(s)=\underset{j}{}\underset{k}{}C_{j,k}\mathrm{\Psi }(2^jsk)=\underset{j,k}{}C_{j,k}\mathrm{\Psi }_{j,k}(s),$$

in terms of integer translations ($`k`$) and dyadic dilations ($`2^j`$) of the $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ wavelet. In order to reduce the number of scales needed, the range of the summation should be choosen as a function of $`s`$. We use in the following the asymptotic formula describing the pointwise behavior of the Gaussian wavelet series around a point $`s_0`$ of interest . For a chosen $`s_0`$ and scale $`j`$, there is only one $`k`$ and $`|ϵ|1`$ such that the support of the corresponding $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{j,k}`$ contains this point, $`k=2^js_0+ϵ`$. We can express the solution and its derivatives in a neighborhood of this point

$$u(s_0)\mathrm{\Psi }(ϵ)\underset{j}{}C_{j,2^js_0+ϵ}\underset{j}{}u_j(s_0),$$

$$u_x(s_0)i\mathrm{\Psi }(ϵ)\underset{j}{}2^jC_{j,2^js_0+ϵ}=i\underset{j}{}2^ju_j(s_0),$$
(29)
for $`ϵ`$ being chosen enough large compared to one, and where $`u_j(s_0)=\mathrm{\Psi }(ϵ)C_{j,2^js_0+ϵ}\mathrm{\Psi }(0)C_{j,2^js_0}`$… Since the coefficient $`1/2^j`$ represents the scale for each $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{j,k}`$ Gaussian wavelet, we can define it as a characteristic half-width $`L_j`$. Also, we finally have for the $`n`$-th order derivative in $`s_0`$

$$u_{xx\mathrm{}x}(s_0)\underset{j}{}\frac{u_j(s_0)}{L_j^n}.$$
(30)
Eq.(30) is the multi-scale generalization of the simpler formula $`ii`$ in eq(1). With eq.(30) in hand we can investigate the structure of hypothetic soliton solutions of NPDE, by choosing $`s_0`$ in the neighborhood of the maximum value of the solution, $`u(s_0)=A`$. Around this maximum, such solutions can be described very well by a unique scale $`L`$, and hence the solution and its derivatives can be approximated with the corresponding dominant term, by the substitutions in eq.(1).

### 5.2 Appendix 2

For the sake of simplicity we will renormalize the coefficients of the K(2,2) equation such that the support of the simple compacton is one. That is, we take $`\eta _c(x,t)=\eta _{kak}(\pi (xVt),0)`$ on the interval $`|xVt|`$ in $`[1/2,1/2]`$. We construct a multiresolution approximation of $`L^2(𝐑)`$, that is an increasing sequence of closed subspaces $`V_j`$, $`j𝐙`$, of $`L^2(𝐑)`$ with the following properties

1. The $`V_j`$ subspaces are all disjoint and their union is dense in $`L^2(𝐑)`$.
2. For any function $`fL^2(𝐑)`$ and for any integer $`j`$ we have $`f(x)V_j`$ if and only if $`D^1f(x)V_{j1}`$ where $`D^1`$ is an operator that will be defined later.
3. For any function $`fL^2(𝐑)`$ and for any integer $`k`$, we have $`f(x)V_0`$ is equivalent to $`f(xk)V_0`$.
4. There is a function $`g(x)V_0`$ such that the sequence $`g(xk)`$ with $`k𝐙`$ is a Riesz basis of $`V_0`$.

In the case of compact solutions of K(2,2) of unit length, we chose for the space $`V_0`$ that which is generated by all translation of $`\eta _c`$ with any integer $`k`$. The subspaces $`V_j`$ for $`j0`$ are generated by all integer translations of the compressed version of this function, namely, by $`\eta _{kak}(2^j\pi (xVt),0)`$. The subspaces $`V_j`$ for $`j0`$ are generated by all integer translations of the KAK solution of length $`\lambda 2^j1`$. For example, $`V_1`$ is generated by $`\eta _{kak}(\pi (x2^jVt),0)`$. The spaces $`V_j,j0`$ are all solutions of K(2,2); the others are not. The function $`g(x)`$ is taken to be $`\eta _{kak}(\pi (xVt),0)`$. It is not difficult to prove that these definitions fulfill restrictions one, three, and four. As for the second criterion, we define the action of the operator $`D^1f(x)=f(2x)`$ if $`f(x)V_j`$ with a $`j`$ positive integer, and $`D^1\eta _{kak}(\pi 2^j(x2^jVt),2^j1)=\eta _{kak}(\pi 2^j(x2^{j+1}Vt),2^{j+1}1)`$ for negative $`j`$. In conclusion, we construct a frame of functions made of contractions of compactons and sequences of KAK solutions. We can write the corresponding two-scale equation which connects the subspaces

$$\eta _{kak}(\pi (xVt),1)=\eta _{kak}(\pi (xVt),0)+\eta _{kak}(\pi (xVt1),0).$$
(31)
We will denote generically by $`\eta _{k,j}`$ the elements of this frame, that is

$$\eta _{k,j}(x)=\eta _{kak}(\pi (x2^jVtk),2^j1)|_{t=0},$$
(32)
where $`t=0`$ means that we neglect the time evolution, but the amplitude is still amplified with a factor of $`2^j`$, in virtue of relation $`\eta _{max}=4V/3`$.

Figure Captions

* Fig. 1

Examples of compactons, kink-antikink pairs, and mixed solutions of the K(2,2) equation, together with their velocities.
* Fig. 2

A finite series of K(2,2) compactons emerging from initial compact data of width larger than of the compacton.
* Fig. 3

The half-width $`L`$ versus velocity $`V`$ for the K(2,2) equation, for different amplitudes A. Widths larger than $`L_{compacton}=4`$ behave different than narrower widths, with $`L<4`$. Amplitude increases from left to right, in the range 0.01-0.85.
* Fig. 4

The half-width $`L`$ versus amplitude $`A`$, for the third ($`n=3`$), forth ($`n=4`$) and fifth ($`n=5`$) order NLS equation, in two $`V=\pm A`$ cases. We notice that the higher order ($`n>3`$) NLS equations have bifurcations.
* Fig. 5

The dynamical evolution of the expansion in the KAK basis of a finite initial pulse of width $`L`$ much larger than a compacton, drawn for three moments if time.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In the spirit of Piron (1964, 1976, 1977), Jauch and Piron (1969), Aerts (1982), Foulis et al. (1983), Foulis and Randall (1984), Faure et al. (1995), Moore (1995, 1999), Amira et al. (1998) and Coecke and Stubbe (1999a, 1999b), we will point out the correspondence between the act of ‘inducing properties’ (Amira et al., 1998) and perfect measurements (Piron, 1976) — that is a joint ideal measurement of the first kind of a property and its orthocomplement. We describe the transitions that occur in such a perfect measurement, and this will involve aspects of algebraic quantum logic (Birkhoff and von Neumann, 1936; Husimi, 1937; Sasaki, 1954; Jauch, 1968; Piron, 1976; Kalmbach, 1983) and linear logic (Girard, 1987, 1989), in particular some of the non-commutative variants (Abrusci, 1990, 1991). Indeed, since general not-necessarily deterministic property transitions yield quantale descriptions (Amira et al., 1998; Coecke and Stubbe, 1999b) whereas non-commutative linear logic yields quantale semantical models, the formal motivation for a logical description of perfect measurements incorporating linear logical operations naturally arises.

In this paper, operational quantum logic (OQL) stands for the Geneva school approach to states and properties of a physical entity —we will not go into details and refer for the most recent overview to Moore (1999). The properties $``$ of the entity are ordered by an —physically deducible— implication relation, as such structured as a poset which proves to be meet-complete as a semilattice (Piron, 1976), and as such also complete as a lattice, the join given by $`_ia_i=\{a|i:aa_i\}`$. A property is said to be actual if it is true, i.e., any verification of it would yield a positive answer with certainty, and a state is then defined as the strongest actual property an entity possesses. We call a set of properties an actuality set if at least one property in it is actual. Note that if $`A`$ is an actuality set, we have immediately that $`A:=_{aA}a`$ is an actual property, and we will refer to this ‘strongest property of which $`A`$ implies actuality’ as a definite actual property of an actuality set. As shown by Piron (1964, 1976), a complete lattice yields a representation as the projection lattice of a ‘generalized’ Hilbert space if and only if it is atomistic, orthomodular and satisfies the covering law, as such assuring a realization within standard quantum theory. In this paper it suffices to require besides completeness only orthomodularity of the lattice, the latter defined by: (i) there exists $`{}_{}{}^{}:`$ fulfilling $`abb^{}a^{}`$, $`aa^{}=0`$, $`aa^{}=1`$, $`a^{}=a`$, and, (ii) $`ab`$ implies $`a(a^{}b)=b`$. In the second section we show how the scheme developed in Amira et al. (1998) and Coecke and Stubbe (1999a, 1999b) ‘lifts’ the Baer-semigroups considered as state transitions by Pool (1968) —and introduced by Foulis (1960) as a natural collection of morphisms for orthomodular lattices that embeds the closed orthogonal projections on this lattice— to more general classes of morphisms that express indeterministic transitions. In a third section we translate this in logical axioms, explicitly expressing that these transitions are due to the interaction with an externally imposed context, and in the particular case of quantum measurements a ‘perfect measurement context’.

## 2 Propagation of properties due to a perfect measurement

The maps $`𝒫()=\{\phi _a::ba(ba^{})|a\}`$ —the ‘Sasaki (1954) projections’— prove to be the set of all closed orthogonal projections on $``$ , and are by $`\theta :𝒫():a\phi _a`$ in isomorphic correspondence with $``$ when ordered by $`\phi _a\phi _a^{}\phi _a\phi _a^{}=\phi _a`$ (Foulis, 1960; Piron, 1995). However, the maps $`\phi _a`$ are not closed under their natural operation ‘composition’, and should be considered as embedded in $`𝒮():=\{f:|f(_ia_i)=_if(a_i)\}`$ the corresponding complete Baer-semigroup: note here that $`𝒮()`$ is itself a join-complete lattice with respect to the pointwise computed order $`ff^{}a:f(a)f^{}(a)`$, yielding a pointwise computable join for all $`\{f_i\}_i𝒮()`$ as $`_if_i::a_if_i(a)`$. However, the inclusion of $`𝒫()`$ —with ordering inherited from $``$ through $`\theta `$— in $`(𝒮(),)`$ does not preserve the partial order. Indeed, for $`a,a^{}`$ with $`a^{}a^{}1`$ and $`aa^{}=0`$ we have $`aaa^{}`$, but since $`0<\phi _a(a^{})a`$ and $`\phi _{aa^{}}(a^{})=a^{}`$ it follows that $`\phi _a^{}\phi _{aa^{}}(a^{})=0`$ and thus $`\phi _a(a^{})\phi _{aa^{}}(a^{})`$ so that $`\phi _a\phi _{aa^{}}`$ although $`\phi _a\phi _{aa^{}}`$. Instead of considering the closed orthogonal projections $`𝒫()`$, we will rather consider $`𝒫^\mathrm{\#}()=\{\phi _{\{a,a^{}\}}|a\}`$ with —$`P`$ denotes the powerset of $`\{0\}`$:

$$\phi _{\{a,a^{}\}}:PP:B\{\phi _a(b)|bB,ba^{}\}\{\phi _a^{}(b)|bB,ba\}$$
(1)
The maps in $`𝒫^\mathrm{\#}()`$ will be interpreted as describing the propagation of properties in perfect measurements:

A property $`b`$ that is actual before the measurement yields an actual property $`\phi _a(b)`$ or $`\phi _a^{}(b)`$ after it. In general neither $`\phi _a(b)`$ nor $`\phi _a^{}(b)`$ ‘will be’ actual with certainty after the measurement, provided that $`ba`$ and $`ba^{}`$. The strongest ‘definite actual property’ for the actuality set $`\{\phi _a(b),\phi _a^{}(b)\}`$ is $`\phi _a(b)\phi _a^{}(b)`$. It has been motivated that actual properties propagate preserving the join (Pool, 1968; Faure et al., 1995) as such giving the maps in $`𝒮()`$ the significance of describing propagation of actual properties. Therefore, given an initial actuality set, we consider them as describing the propagations of the definite actual properties.

It is again natural to consider the maps $`\phi _{\{a,a^{}\}}`$ as belonging to a more general collection closed under composition, but due to the formal change of domain from the $``$-lattice $``$ to the $``$-lattice $`P`$ this requires an essentially different approach. A construction that allows this embedment is proposed in Amira et al. (1998) and Coecke and Stubbe (1999a, 1999b) and will now be applied to the maps defined by eq(1). The set $`𝒫^\mathrm{\#}()`$ is canonically in surjective correspondence with $`𝒫()`$ and thus with $``$ itself by $`\varphi :𝒫()𝒫^\mathrm{\#}():\phi _a\phi _{\{a,a^{}\}}`$ that factorizes in:

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\theta ^P:𝒫()𝒫^P():\phi _a[PP:B\{\phi _a(b)|bB,ba^{}\}]\hfill \\ \eta :𝒫^P()𝒫^\mathrm{\#}():\theta ^P(\phi _a)\theta ^P(\phi _a)\theta ^P(\phi _a^{})\hfill \end{array}$$
(2)
where $`𝒫^P()`$ is implicitly defined as the range of $`\theta ^P`$. The following is obvious.

###### Proposition 1

. (i) $`\phi _{\{a,a^{}\}}=\phi _{\{a^{},a^{}\}}`$; (ii) $`\varphi (\phi _a)=\varphi (\phi _b)b\{a,a^{}\}`$.

Thus, $`𝒫^\mathrm{\#}()`$, $`𝒫()/`$ and $`/`$ are in bijective correspondence for the equivalence relation $`\phi _b\phi _a`$ (respectively $`ab`$) iff $`b\{a,a^{}\}`$. Clearly, the ordering of $`(𝒫(),)`$ is in no way inherited by $`𝒫^\mathrm{\#}()`$. However, as we will show next, the maps in $`𝒫^\mathrm{\#}()`$ can be considered as incomparable with respect to the partial ordering inherited from $`(𝒮(),)`$. For maps $`f:PP`$, denote the condition $`A,BP:A=Bf(A)=f(B)`$ as $`A^\mathrm{\#}`$, and define the following subset of $`𝒮(P)`$:

$$𝒬^\mathrm{\#}():=\{f:PP|f(_iA_i)=_if(A_i),fmeetsA^\mathrm{\#}\}$$
(3)
As shown in Amira et al. (1998) and Coecke and Stubbe (1999a) it is exactly the condition $`A^\mathrm{\#}`$ that forces the definite actual properties to propagate preserving the join. We will now sketch how this connection between $`𝒬^\mathrm{\#}()`$ and $`𝒮()`$ is realized. Set:

$$\theta ^P:𝒮()𝒮(P):f[PP:B\{f(b)|bB\}]$$
(4)
Recall that a quantale (Mulvey, 1986) is a join-complete lattice equipped with an operation $``$ that distributes at both sides over arbitrary joins. Quantale morphisms preserve $``$ and all joins. The following proposition can be found in Coecke and Stubbe (1999a, 1999b).

###### Proposition 2

. The set $`P𝒮^P()=\left\{_i\theta ^P(f_i)\right|i:f_i𝒮()\}`$ defines a strict subquantale of $`(𝒬^\mathrm{\#}(),,)`$, where $``$ denotes pointwisely computed unions and $``$ composition. Moreover, the map $`[]:𝒬^\mathrm{\#}()𝒮():f[:af(\{a\})]`$ is a surjective quantale morphism.

Clearly $`𝒫^\mathrm{\#}()P𝒮^P()`$ which is closed under composition, and since $`𝒫^\mathrm{\#}()𝒬^\mathrm{\#}()`$, the corresponding definite actual properties propagate preserving the join. Indeed, given the union preserving map $`\phi _{\{a,a^{}\}}`$, the map describing the propagation of definite actual properties is the join preserving map $`[\phi _{\{a,a^{}\}}]::b\phi _a(b)\phi _a^{}(b)`$. The following (non fully commutative!) scheme summarizes all the above situating $`𝒫()`$ and $`𝒮()`$ relative to $`𝒫^\mathrm{\#}()`$ and $`𝒬^\mathrm{\#}()`$:

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccc}& \stackrel{}{}& 𝒫()& & (𝒮(),,)& & & & \\ & & & & & & & & \\ & & \varphi & & & & ^{{\scriptscriptstyle []}}& & \\ & & & & & & & & \\ & & 𝒫^\mathrm{\#}()& & (𝒫𝒮^P(),,)& & (𝒬^\mathrm{\#}(),,)& & (𝒮(P),,)\end{array}$$
(5)
We will now apply the above to the physical situation where a physical entity is placed in a measurement context that induces a perfect measurement. Recall that $`a,b`$ are compatible if the Boolean sublattice generated by $`\{a,a^{},b,b^{}\}`$ distributes.

###### Definition 1

. An ‘induction’ on a physical entity is an externally imposed change of properties. A ‘perfect measurement induction’, characterized by a pair $`\{a,a^{}\}`$, is an induction such that after it the property $`a`$ is actual ‘or’ the property $`a^{}`$ is actual, and any property $`b`$ which is compatible with $`a`$ — and as such also with $`a^{}`$ — that is actual before is still actual afterwards.

Using eq(1), Proposition 1 and Piron (1976) p.69 Theorem 4.3 one obtains:

###### Proposition 3

. Given a perfect measurement induction of $`\{a,a^{}\}`$ on an entity with property lattice $``$, the map $`\phi _{\{a,a^{}\}}:PP`$ describes the propagation of actuality sets.

Clearly, these perfect measurement inductions can be interpreted as a minimal disturbance of the entity assuring actuality of $`a`$ ‘or’ $`a^{}`$. The essence of this remark boils down to the use of ‘or’ which in this case is a disjunction expressing what we could call inner non determinism:

Indeed, crucial in the notion of a perfect measurement induction is that we express how two properties both have an ability ‘to be’ actual in case we are going to perform the induction. This aspect forces us to consider unions of transitions and underlying actuality sets, i.e., considering maps in $`𝒬^\mathrm{\#}()`$ rather than in $`𝒮()`$.

## 3 A logical description for perfect measurements

In this section we give logical axioms for the propagation of properties , more precisely of actuality sets, in perfect measurements —i.e., the maps above described by $`𝒫^\mathrm{\#}()`$ and their finite compositions— explicitly expressing that the measurement process is a non-deterministic transition due to interaction with an externally imposed context —see for example Gisin and Piron (1981). A detailed description of the logical language, containing the elementary and well formed formula’s linked to physical entities, and sequent calculus for describing property transitions in general is being elaborated on in Coecke and Smets (n.d.). In this paper we stick to a combination of a fragment of non-commutative linear logic and OQL. We will need some of the Left and Right sequent rules of non-commutative intuitionistic linear logic $`NCIL`$ as defined in Abrusci (1990), extended to a predicate calculus:

$`\begin{array}{cc}(id.):=\frac{}{^{AA}}& (cut):=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }A\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,A,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\mathrm{\Delta }}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,\mathrm{\Gamma },\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\mathrm{\Delta }}\end{array}`$
$`\begin{array}{cc}(,R):=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1A\mathrm{\Gamma }_2B}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2AB}& (,L):=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,A,B,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\mathrm{\Delta }}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,(AB),\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\mathrm{\Delta }}\end{array}`$
$`\begin{array}{ccc}(,R1):=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }A}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(AB)}& (,R2):=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }B}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(AB)}& (,L):=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,A,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,B,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\mathrm{\Delta }}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,(AB),\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\mathrm{\Delta }}\end{array}`$
$`\begin{array}{cc}(,R):=\frac{A,\mathrm{\Gamma }B}{\mathrm{\Gamma }AB}& (,L):=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }A\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,B,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\mathrm{\Delta }}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,\mathrm{\Gamma },(AB),\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\mathrm{\Delta }}\end{array}`$
$`\begin{array}{cc}(,R):=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }A}{\mathrm{\Gamma }xA}(xnotfreein\mathrm{\Gamma })& (,L):=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,A[y/x],\mathrm{\Gamma }_2B}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1,xA,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2B}\end{array}`$
We express the properties in $`_r\{0\}`$ for physical entity $`r`$, as property-terms (constants and variables) in our logical language. We will limit ourselves to the following primitive propositions:

$`In_r(x)`$ $`:=`$ $`xisactualforphysicalentityr`$
$`R_r(x)`$ $`:=`$ $`xandonlyxisreachableforphysicalentityr`$
$`M_r(x,x^{})`$ $`:=`$ $`xorx^{}willbeinducedonphysicalentityr`$
where formula $`M_r(x,x^{})`$ should be thought of as representing the measurement context imposed on the entity in order to induce properties, and thus stands for the ‘induction’ itself.

Given the fact that we work with OQL yielding an additional structure for our property-terms within the considered fragment of non-commutative linear logic, we add the axioms which show essential OQL-features:

$`\begin{array}{cc}_{xX}[In_r(x)]In_r(X)& In_r(x)In_r(xy)\end{array}`$
All the following axioms express the content of an arbitrary map $`\phi _{\{a,a^{}\}}𝒫^\mathrm{\#}()`$ by considering eq(1) and incorporate explicitly the role of the induction context:

$`\{\begin{array}{c}\underset{¯}{Trans}:yz:In_r(y)R_r(z)In_r\left(\phi _z(y)\right)R_r\left(\phi _z(y)\right)\\ \underset{¯}{Adjust1}:xy\{x,x^{}\}:M_r(x,x^{})[In_r(y)R_r(y)]In_r(y)((R_r(x)R_r(x^{}))\\ \underset{¯}{Adjust2}:xyx:M_r(x,x^{})[In_r(y)R_r(y)]In_r(y)R_r(y)\end{array}`$
The first axiom $`\underset{¯}{Trans}`$, expresses the induction of one reachable property according to the Sasaki projection. The second axiom $`\underset{¯}{Adjust1}`$ expresses a re-adjustment of the entity relative to the imposed induction-context. With other words, it expresses the act of imposing the induction-context $`M_r(x,x^{})`$ on the entity $`r`$ consisting of an actual and reachable property.

Consider in the following application, an initial situation $`M(b,b^{})[In(a)R(a)]`$ of a physical entity with actual property $`a`$, assuming that $`ba`$ and $`ba^{}`$ —we drop the subscript $`r`$ since we consider only one physical entity. Note that we use not only the expression of the current property which is actual for the entity but also the fact that this same property is reachable for the entity. It is now our aim to express the fact that the entity with property $`a`$ will end up with actually having one of the possible properties $`b`$ or $`b^{}`$ which are reachable according to the given induction.

$$\begin{array}{c}M(b,b^{})[In(a)R(a)]\left[In\left(\phi _b(a)\right)R\left(\phi _b(a)\right)\right]\left[In\left(\phi _b^{}(a)\right)R\left(\phi _b^{}(a)\right)\right]\end{array}$$
(13)
This is indeed an expression in our fragment of non-commutative linear logic and OQL which is provable according to the following subproofs which we can establish, using our axioms and logical tools:

1) We need to adjust our entity to the given measurement context (update $`R`$, given $`M`$), using $`\underset{¯}{Adjust1}`$. We need the elimination of the universal quantifier twice, and Modus Ponens ‘$`A,ABB`$’:

$$M(b,b^{})[In(a)R(a)]In(a)(R(b)R(b^{}))$$
(14)
2) Using distributivity of $``$ over $``$222See in Abrusci(1990) the fragment of definition 2.1 :“…$`X,,1,,,,\&,,,`$ is a non-commutative intuitionistic \*-linear structure iff … (xvii) $`xXyXzX:z(xy)=(zx)(zy)`$.”:

$$In(a)(R(b)R(b^{}))[In(a)R(b)][In(a)R(b^{})]$$
(15)
3) Using the axiom $`\underset{¯}{Trans}`$, the elimination of the universal quantifier twice, and Modus Ponens:

$$In(a)R(b)In(\phi _b(a))R(\phi _b(a))$$
(16)
4) Using the axiom $`\underset{¯}{Trans}`$, the elimination of the universal quantifier twice, and Modus Ponens, then:

$$In(a)R(b^{})In(\phi _b^{}(a))R(\phi _b^{}(a))$$
(17)
Finally by the previous subproofs we obtain our goal, i.e., eq(13).

Some additional remarks:

(i) In our formalism we can perform a succession of inductions. Referring back to eq(1), we can rediscover $`\phi _{\{c,c^{}\}}\phi _{\{b,b^{}\}}(\{a\})=\{\phi _c(\phi _b(a)),\phi _c^{}(\phi _b(a)),\phi _c(\phi _b^{}(a)),\phi _c^{}(\phi _b^{}(a))\}`$ as —for those $`c`$ that satisfy it:

$`\begin{array}{c}M(c,c^{})([In(\phi _b(a))R(\phi _b(a))][In(\phi _b^{}(a))R(\phi _b^{}(a))])\hfill \\ [In(\phi _c(\phi _b(a)))R(\phi _c(\phi _b(a)))][In(\phi _c^{}(\phi _b(a)))R(\phi _c^{}(\phi _b(a)))]\hfill \\ [In(\phi _c(\phi _b^{}(a)))R(\phi _c(\phi _b^{}(a)))][In(\phi _c^{}(\phi _b^{}(a)))R(\phi _c^{}(\phi _b^{}(a)))]\hfill \end{array}`$
Remark that $`M(c,c^{})([In(\phi _b(a))R(\phi _b(a))][In(\phi _b^{}(a))R(\phi _b^{}(a))])`$ could also have been expressed by $`M(c,c^{})(M(b,b^{})[In(a)R(a)])`$, which points at the fact that we have to restrict associativity for the multiplicative conjunction.

(ii) This logical description generalizes to all transitions of properties described in $`𝒬^\mathrm{\#}()`$. Set:

$`\begin{array}{c}IND_r(\alpha ):=Thephysicalentityrisplacedwithinthecontextinducingpropagation\alpha \end{array}`$
where $`\alpha `$ takes values $`f:PP`$ in $`𝒬^\mathrm{\#}()`$ and set $`K_f=\{a|f(\{a\})=\mathrm{}\}`$. The following axiom expresses the content of the maps in $`𝒬^\mathrm{\#}()`$:

$`\underset{¯}{GeneralPropagation}:\alpha xK_\alpha :IND_r(\alpha )In_r(x)_{z\alpha (\{x\})}In_r(z)`$
yielding formal implementation of $`A^\mathrm{\#}`$ as $`IND_r(\alpha )In_r(X)In_r(\alpha (X))`$ implicitly for $`\alpha (X)\mathrm{}`$. We recover the combined axioms $`\underset{¯}{Trans}`$, $`\underset{¯}{Adjust1}`$ and $`\underset{¯}{Adjust2}`$ for a particular $`\phi _{\{y,y^{}\}}`$ as:

$`\begin{array}{c}x:IND_r(\phi _{\{y,y^{}\}})In_r(x)_{z\phi _{\{y,y^{}\}}(\{x\})}In_r(z)\end{array}`$
## 4 References

Birkhoff, G., and von Neumann, J. (1936) Ann. Math. 37, 823.

Husimi, K. (1937) Proc. Physicomath. Soc. Japan 19, 766

Sasaki, U. (1954) J. Sci. Hiroshima Univ. A17, 293.

Foulis, D.J. (1960) Proc. AMS 11, 648.

Jauch, J.M. (1968) Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Addison-Wesley.

Jauch, J.M., and Piron, C. (1969) Helv. Phys. Acta 42, 842.

Piron, C. (1964) Helv. Phys. Acta 37, 439.

Pool, J.C.T. (1968) Comm. Math. Phys. 9, 118.

Piron, C. (1976) Foundations of Quantum Physics, W. A. Benjamin, Inc.

Piron, C. (1977) J. Phyl. Logic 6, 481.

Gisin, N. and Piron, C. (1981) Lett. Math. Phys. 5, 379.

Aerts, D. (1982) Found. Phys. 12, 1131.

Foulis, D.J., Randall, C.H., and Piron, C. (1983) Found. Phys. 13, 813.

Foulis, D.J. and Randall (1984) Found. Phys. 14, 65.

Kalmbach, G. (1983) Orthomodular Lattices, Academic Press.

Mulvey, C.J. (1986) Rend. Circ. Math. Palermo 12, 99.

Girard, J.Y. (1987) Theor. Comp. Sc. 50, 1.

Girard, J.Y. (1989) Contemporary Mathematics 92, 69.

Abrusci, V.M. (1990) Zeitschr. Math. Logik Grundl. Math., 36, 297.

Abrusci, V.M. (1991) The journal of Symbolic Logic 56, 1403.

Faure, Cl.-A., Moore, D.J., and Piron, C. (1995) Helv. Phys. Acta 68, 150.

Moore, D.J. (1995) Helv. Phys. Acta 68, 658.

Piron, C. (1995) Int. J. Theor. Phys. 34, 1681.

Amira, H., Coecke, B., and Stubbe, I. (1998) Helv. Phys. Acta 71, 554.

Coecke, B., and Stubbe, I. (1999a) Found. Phys. Lett 12, 29.

Coecke, B., and Stubbe, I. (1999b) ‘State Transitions as Morphisms for Join Complete lattices’, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 39, 605.

Moore, D.J. (1999) ‘On State Spaces and Property Lattices’, Stud. Hist. Phil. Mod. Phys. 30, 61.

Coecke, B., and Smets, S. (n.d.) ‘Combining Quantum and Linear Logic for Propagating Physical Properties’, in preparation.