text:
# The 3D Quasigeostrophic Fluid Dynamics under Random Forcing on Boundary

## 1. Introduction

We will study the quasigeostrophic equation (QGE) for the ocean in a three dimensional domain. This geophysical flow model has been formally derived as an approximation of the rotating three-dimensional primitive equations . Bourgeois and Beale , Embid and Majda , and Desjardins and Grenier  have recently shown that the three-dimensional quasigeostrophic equation is a valid approximation of the primitive equations in the limit of zero Rossby number. Holm  has established the Hamiltonian formulation for the inviscid quasigeostrophic equation. In particular, we will consider the following version  of the equation in terms of the stream function $`\psi (x,y,z,t)`$:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi _t& +J(\psi ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi )+\beta \psi _x=\nu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi \hfill \\ & \text{with}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi =\psi _{xx}+\psi _{yy}+\left(\frac{f_0^2}{N^2(z)}\psi _z\right)_z\hfill \end{array}$$

Here $`x,y,z`$ are Cartesian coordinates in zonal (east), meridional (north), vertical directions, respectively; $`f_0+\beta y`$ (with $`f_0,\beta `$ constants) is the Coriolis parameter; $`N(z)>0`$ is the Brunt-Vaisala stratification frequency, and $`\nu >0`$ is viscosity. Moreover, $`J(f,g)=f_xg_yf_yg_x`$ is the Jacobi operator and potential vorticity is defined as $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi +f_0+\beta y`$. Note that $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi `$ can be regarded as a modified Laplacian operator where the coefficient in the vertical $`z`$ direction is adjusted due to the density stratification, and the coefficients in $`x,y`$ directions are constants due to the horizontal density homogenity in the 3D quasigeostrophic flow model formulation. Bennett and Kloeden  have also used a similar modified Laplacian viscous term in a more complicated 3D quasigeostrophic flow model involving thermodynamics as well as hydrodynamics.
Our aim is to study the potential verticity evolution in an ocean under the influence of the atmosphere. Following an idea of Hasselmann  one can divide the geophysical or meteorological flow into two parts. These two parts are the slowly changing climate part and rapidly changing weather part. The weather part can be modeled by a stochastic process such as white noise, see Hasselmann , Arnold  and Saltzman . Oceanic flows are affected (on the ocean surface) by these short time influences due to weather variations which are usually called wind forcing. Moreover, oceanic flows are also affected by climatic variations due to periodic rotation of the earth and thus periodic exposure of the earth to the solar radiation; see , Chapter 6 and , Chapter 11.

Since the exchange between the atmosphere and an ocean takes place at the surface of the ocean, we will consider the above quasigeostrophic partial differential equation with white noise Neumann boundary condition on the top surface of the ocean . We will also add some time-periodic boundary condition on the ocean surface due to periodic rotation of the earth and the solar radiation. Since there is no influence of the weather at the bottom of the ocean we will have the homogeneous boundary condition there. The boundary conditions in horizontal directions are assumed to be periodic for mathematical convenience as in other recent works . However, since we have a forth order differential operator at the right hand side of the quasigeostrophic equation, we need a second group of boundary conditions, say, for $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi `$, and these conditions are the ones used in ,  to be specified below. For simplicity we will suppose that this second group of boundary conditions are deterministic. But generalizations are possible.

Our aim is to find structures in the dynamics of the QGE. As we have time dependent random and time-periodic boundary conditions, we will obtain a nonautonomous dynamical system with random influences. We will show how to find attractors for such a dynamical system. The existence and interpretation of climatic attractors have been controversial and have caused a lot of debate . A low dimensional climatic attractor was regarded as an indication that the main feature of long-time climatic evolution may be viewed as the manifestation of a deterministic dynamics. Our result is about random attractors, and thus the long time regimes that such attractors may represent still carry the stochastic information of the geophysical flow system. Stochastically forced QGE has been used to investigate various mechanisims in geophysical flows .

The QGE can be transformed into an evolution equation with standard boundary conditions. For this transformation we need an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process fulfilling our dynamical random or time-periodic boundary conditions. This transformation will be introduced in Section 2.
In Section 3 we investigate the coefficients of the transformed evolution equation, and further obtain a global existence and uniqueness result and some regularity result.
In Section 4, we study the random dynamics of the transformed QGE. Based on the uniqueness result above, the transformed evolution equation generates a nonautonomous dynamical system. In addition, if we restrict this system to discrete time step of the period of the periodic rotation of the earth, we obtain a random dynamical system. This random dynamical system has a random attractor. This result can be extended to the dynamical system on the real time axis.
The Section 5 contains the proofs. Finally, we summarize our results in Section 6.

## 2. The 3D quasigeostrophic equation

Let $`O=(0,2\pi )^3`$ be the cube which is a model for a piece of the ocean. For $`x,y,z(0,2\pi )`$ and smooth functions $`u(x,y,z),v(x,y,z)`$ we define the Jacobi operator

$$J(u,v)=u_xv_yu_yv_x.$$

In addition, the differential operator $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ is defined by

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}:=_{xx}+_{yy}+\left(F(z)_z\right)_z$$

for $`f_00,F(z):=\frac{f_0^2}{N^2(z)}`$ and $`N(z)`$ is defined to be a positive $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-smooth function $`N(z)>0`$ on $`[0,2\pi ]`$. Let $`\nu ,\beta `$ be positive constants. In the following we investigate the 3D QGE flow model :

(1)
$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi _t+J(\psi ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi )+\beta \psi _x=\nu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi .$$

We impose the following boundary conditions for this equation. Let $`O_{,,0},O_{,,2\pi },\mathrm{}`$ be the faces of the cube $`O`$ then we assume periodic boundary conditions in $`x,y`$ directions

$$\psi |_{O_{0,,}}=\psi |_{O_{2\pi ,,}}\psi _x|_{O_{0,,}}=\psi _x|_{O_{2\pi ,,}}$$

and similar for the faces $`O_{,0,},O_{,2\pi ,}`$ together with derivative in $`y`$ direction. With respect to the $`z`$ direction, $`\psi `$ fulfills Neumann boundary conditions on top and bottom boundaries; see , p.367. Namely, we impose that

$$\frac{\psi }{n}=\psi _z=0\text{on bottom boundary}O_{,,0}$$

and

$$\frac{\psi }{n}=\psi _z=\dot{W}\text{on top boundary}O_{,,2\pi },$$

where $`\dot{W}`$ is a temporal white noise and $`n`$ denotes the unit outer normal vector.
Moreover, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi `$ is supposed to be periodic in $`x,y`$ directions:

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi |_{O_{0,,}}=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi |_{O_{2\pi ,,}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi _x|_{O_{0,,}}=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi _x|_{O_{2\pi ,,}}$$

and similar for the faces $`O_{,0,},O_{,2\pi ,}`$ with derivative in $`y`$ direction. For the other faces on the top and the bottom of the ocean, we impose homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions as in

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi _z|_{O_{,,0}}=0,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi _z|_{O_{,,2\pi }}=0$$

In addition, we impose that

$$_O\psi 𝑑O=0,$$

and

$$_O\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi 𝑑O=0.$$

We also assume an appropriate initial condition

$$\psi (x,y,z,0)=\psi _0(x,y,z).$$

Later on we will see that we can find an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process $`\eta `$ satisfying the linear differential equation

(2)
$$\eta _t=\nu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta ,$$

where $`\eta `$ fulfills the same boundary conditions as $`\psi `$ in some sense.

We now transform formally the above equation to another parabolic differential equation with random coefficients but with standard boundary conditions. To do this we have to introduce the solution operator $`G`$ of the following elliptic problem:

(3)
$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\xi =f$$

on $`O`$ with periodic boundary conditions in $`x,y`$ directions and homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions in $`z`$ direction. For existence and regularity properties of this operator see below. $`G`$ can be considered as a linear continuous operator. Here $`f`$ is an element in a particular Hilbert space.
For the difference of $`\psi `$ and $`\eta `$ we obtain for (1)

$`(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta )_t`$ $`+`$ $`J(\psi \eta ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta )+J(\eta ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta )+J(\psi \eta ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta )+J(\eta ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta )`$
$`+`$ $`\beta (\psi \eta )_x+\beta \eta _x=\nu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\psi \eta )`$
where $`\eta `$ is assumed to be sufficiently regular. The difference $`\psi \eta `$ satisfies the same boundary condition as $`\xi `$ in (3). Hence by the formal substitution $`v=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta `$ we can write

$`v_t`$ $`+J(G(v),v)+J(\eta ,v)+J(G(v),\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta )+J(\eta ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta )`$
$`+\beta G(v)_x+\beta \eta _x=\nu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}v.`$
The problem (2) satisfies only standard boundary conditions with respect to $`\eta `$ but not with respect to $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta `$. To obtain an equation with standard boundary conditions we need the transformation $`u=v+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta `$ assuming formally that $`\eta `$ is sufficiently regular. Then $`u`$ fulfills periodic boundary conditions in $`x,y`$ directions, and satisfies the following random evolution:

(4)
$$u_t+J(G(u),u)+J(\eta G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta ),u)+\beta G(u)_x\beta (G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta ))_x\eta _x)=\nu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}u.$$

This equation will be treated in the rest of the paper.

###### Remark 2.1.

To obtain a solution of the original equation all reverse transformations make sense if $`\eta `$ is contained in a Sobolev space of second order. Hence we can find a solution of this equation contained in this Sobolev space. Thus, in the following we will formulate our results for this transformed random evolution equation (4).
Note that $`\eta G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta )`$ can be handled as a function fulfilling the boundary conditions with $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\eta G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta ))=0`$.

## 3. Existence and uniqueness of the solution for the 3D quasigeostrophic equation

In this section we consider the well-posedness of the transformed QGE (4). We intend to consider equation (4) as an evolution equation on a rigged space $`VHV^{}`$. Since this equation is given with respect to periodic boundary conditions in horizontal directions the space $`H`$ is defined to be

$$\dot{L}_2(O)=\{uL_2(O),_Ou𝑑O=0\}.$$

The inner product on $`H`$ is denoted by $`(,)`$. Let $`H^k,k`$ be the usual Sobolev space consisting of functions with square integrable derivative up to $`k`$-th order. If $`k`$ is not an integer these spaces are the usual Slobodeckij spaces. For $`VH^1H`$ we choose the space of functions from $`H^1`$ such that

$$u|_{O_{0,,}}=u|_{O_{2\pi ,,}},u|_{O_{,0,}}=u|_{O_{,2\pi ,}}.$$

Note that for functions in $`H^1`$ the trace on the boundary is well defined. This set will be equipped with the usual $`H^1`$ inner product denoted by $`(,)_V`$. Let $`A`$ be a linear bounded operator

$$A:VV^{}$$

which is the usual operator stemming from the bilinear form $`a(u,v)`$ defined by $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ with periodic boundary conditions in $`x,y`$ directions and homogeneous Neumann boundary condition in $`z`$ direction. Note that $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ is symmetric with respect to these boundary conditions. We have that

$$Au,u=u_V^2.$$

$`,`$ denotes the dual pairing between $`V^{}=D(A^{\frac{1}{2}})`$ and $`V=D(A^{\frac{1}{2}})`$. The operator $`A`$ is an isomorphism from $`V`$ to $`V^{}`$. Since $`V`$ is compactly embedded in $`H`$ we can define $`G(f)=A^1f`$ which is a continuous operator for instance from $`H`$ to $`D(A)`$ or more generally from $`D(A^s)`$ to $`D(A^{s+1}),s`$. For the definition of the spaces $`D(A^s)`$ and their norms $`_{D(A^s)}`$ see Temam  Section II.2. In particular, for $`fH`$ the function $`G(f)`$ is periodic in $`x,y`$ directions.
On $`H`$ the operator $`A`$ has the spectrum $`0<\lambda _1\lambda _2\mathrm{}`$. The associated eigenfunctions are denoted by $`e_1,e_2,\mathrm{}`$.
The embedding constant between $`V`$ and $`H`$ is given by $`\lambda _1`$:

$$\lambda _1u_H^2u_V^2.$$

We now investigate the properties of the operator $`J`$ which defines the nonlinearity of (4).

###### Lemma 3.1.

Suppose that $`m_1,m_2,m_3`$ are three nonnegative numbers less than $`\frac{3}{2}`$ with

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}m_i\frac{3}{2}.$$

Then there exists a constant $`c_1>0`$ such that for $`uH^{m_1+1},vH^{m_2+1}`$ and $`wH^{m_3}`$

$$|J(u,v),w|c_1u_{H^{m_1+1}}v_{H^{m_2+1}}w_{H^{m_3}}.$$

###### Proof.

On account the Hölder inequality, we get

$$|J(u,v),w|u_{L_{q_1}}v_{L_{q_2}}u_{L_{q_3}},\frac{1}{q_1}+\frac{1}{q_2}+\frac{1}{q_3}1.$$

The embedding property $`H^mL_q(O)`$ where $`\frac{1}{q}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{m}{3}`$ for $`q>1,m0,m\frac{3}{2}`$ gives the conclusion. For the idea of the proof see Temam , Section 2.3. ∎

###### Remark 3.2.

Suppose two of the $`m_i`$’s in the last lemma, say $`m_2,m_3`$, have the value zero. Then if $`m_1`$ is chosen bigger than $`\frac{3}{2}`$ the conclusion of the last lemma remains true. This follows if we apply at first the Sobolev lemma and then the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality.

From Lemma 3.1 we can derive some a priori estimates for the nonlinearity of (4).

###### Corollary 3.3.

Suppose that $`uD(A^\alpha ),\alpha >\frac{3}{4}`$ and $`v,wV`$. Then

$$|J(u,v),w|c_1u_{D(A^\alpha )}v_Vw_V,$$

and hence for $`uH,v,wV`$

$$|J(G(u),v),w|c_1u_Hv_Vw_V.$$

Suppose now that $`uD(A^\alpha ),\alpha >\frac{5}{4}`$ and $`vV,wH`$. Then

$$|J(u,v),w|c_1u_{D(A^\alpha )}v_Vw_H,$$

and hence for $`uD(A^\alpha ),\alpha >\frac{1}{4}`$ and $`vV,wH`$

$$|J(G(u),v),w|c_1u_{D(A^\alpha )}v_Vw_H.$$

Furthermore, if $`uH^2`$ and $`v,wV`$ we have the inequality

$$|J(u,v),w|c_1u_{H^2}v_Vw_V.$$

Based on this Corollary, we also get

###### Lemma 3.4.

For any $`\mu >0`$ there exists a constant $`c_{2,\mu }`$ such that for $`vH`$ and $`uH^2`$

$$|J(u,v),Av)|c_{2,\mu }u_{H^2}^2v_V^2+\mu Av_H^2.$$

and for an $`\eta H^2`$

$$|J(\eta ,v),Av)|c_{2,\mu }^{}\eta _{H^2}v_{D(A^{\frac{3}{4}})}Av_0c_{2,\mu }\eta _{H^2}^4v_V^2+\mu Av_H^2$$

For the last inequality we need an interpolation argument and the Young inequality. Later on we can use this lemma to derive additional regularity properties of (4).

Also on account of Lemma 3.1 we obtain the following algebraic properties of $`J`$.

###### Lemma 3.5.

If $`v,wV`$ and $`uH^2`$ and periodic in $`x`$, $`y`$ directions, then we have

$$J(u,v),w=J(u,w),v.$$

Hence we have $`J(u,v),v=0`$.

###### Proof.

We choose $`u`$ from a set of sufficiently smooth functions which is dense in $`D(A^\alpha )`$. Integration by parts formulae yields

$`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill {\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{O_{,,z}}}& u_xv_ywdxdydz{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{O_{,,z}}}u_yv_xw𝑑x𝑑y𝑑z\hfill \\ & ={\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{O_{,,z}}}u_{xy}vw𝑑x𝑑y𝑑z+{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{O_{,,z}}}u_{yx}vw𝑑x𝑑y𝑑z\hfill \\ & {\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{O_{,,z}}}u_xvw_y𝑑x𝑑y𝑑z+{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{O_{,,z}}}u_yvw_x𝑑x𝑑y𝑑z\hfill \\ & +{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}u_xvw|_{y=0}^{y=2\pi }dxdz{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}u_yvw|_{x=0}^{x=2\pi }dydz.\hfill \end{array}`$
Note that the two boundary terms are zero. Indeed, since $`u(x,0,z)=u(x,2\pi ,z)`$, we know that $`u_x(x,0,z)=u_x(x,2\pi ,z)`$, and since $`v,w`$ are $`2\pi `$–periodic with respect to $`x`$. By the smoothness assumption we can suppose that the derivatives on the boundary are well defined. Thus the first boundary term is zero. Similarly, the second boundary term is also zero. By the continuity of $`J`$ (see Corollary 3.3) we can extend the relation to $`H^2\times V\times V`$. The second claim is due to antisymmetric property of the first claim of this corollary. ∎

The following lemma will be used to obtain the continuity of the solution operator of (4).

###### Lemma 3.6.

There exists a constant $`c_3>0`$ such that for $`u_1,u_2V`$

$$|J(G(u_1),u_1)J(G(u_2),u_2),u_1u_2|c_3u_1u_2_Vu_1u_2_Hu_1_V.$$

###### Proof.

By Lemma 3.5 the left hand side above expression is equal to

$`|J(G(u_1),u_1),u_2`$ $`+J(G(u_2),u_2),u_1|`$
$`=|J(G(u_1),u_1),u_2u_1J(G(u_2),u_1),u_2u_1|`$
$`=|J(G(u_1)G(u_2),u_1),u_1u_2|.`$
Corollary 3.3 gives the conclusion. ∎

The equation (4) can be considered as an evolution equation on the rigged space $`VHV^{}`$ introduced at the beginning of this section.
We now explain the properties of coefficients which are contained in (4). Due to Corollary 3.3 we have a bilinear continuous operator

$$B(,):V\times VH,B(u,v):=J(G(u),v).$$

In addition, we have a time dependent linear operator

$$C(t,u):=J(\eta (t)G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta (t)),u),C(t):VV^{}$$

where $`\eta (t)L_{2,loc}(0,\mathrm{};H^2H)`$ and periodic in $`x,y`$ directions. Then $`G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta (t))D(A)`$.

###### Lemma 3.7.

Suppose that $`\eta ()L_{2,loc}(0,\mathrm{};H^2)`$ and $`\eta `$ is periodic in $`x`$,$`y`$ directions. Then we have for almost any $`t0`$:

$$C(t,)_{V,V^{}}c_4\eta (t)_{H^2},C(t,u),u=0.$$

Indeed, because $`\eta (t)G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta (t))H^2`$ for any $`t0`$ we obtain the first conclusion by Corollary 3.3. The second Conclusion follows from Lemma 3.5.

We now investigate the last linear operator appearing in (4) which is defined by

$$D(u)=\beta G(u)_x:VH.$$

We obtain straightforwardly $`D()_{V,H}c_5`$.

###### Lemma 3.8.

For $`uV`$ we have

$$(D(u),u)=0$$

###### Proof.

Denoting $`G(u)D(A)`$ by $`\xi `$ we have

$`\beta ^1(D(u),u)=`$ $`(\xi _x,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\xi )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}({\displaystyle _O}(\xi _x^2)_xdxdydz(\xi _y^2)_xdxdydz`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}F(z){\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}(\xi _z^2)_xdxdydz)`$
via the integration by parts. The second term under the integral generates the boundary term

$$\frac{1}{2}_0^{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }\xi _x\xi _y|_{y=0}^{y=2\pi }dxdz.$$

Indeed, for sufficiently smooth $`\xi `$ from a dense set in $`V`$ we have $`\xi (x,0,z)=\xi (x,2\pi ,z)`$ and thus $`\xi _x(x,0,z)=\xi _x(x,2\pi ,z)`$. It follows from the periodicity in $`y`$ we have $`\xi _y(x,0,z)=\xi _y(x,2\pi ,z)`$ such that this boundary term is zero.
For the last term the following boundary term appears

$$\frac{1}{2}_0^{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }F(z)\xi _x\xi _z|_{z=0}^{z=2\pi }dxdy$$

which is zero by the homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions. Integration with respect to $`x`$ and using the periodicity as in the proof of Lemma 3.5, we get the conclusion. ∎

We can formulate the evolution equation (4) on $`VHV^{}`$

(5)
$$u_t+\nu Au+B(u,u)+C(t,u)+D(u)=f(t),u(0)=u_0H$$

for $`f(t)=\beta (G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta (t))_x\eta (t)_x)`$ which is contained in $`L_{2,loc}(0,\mathrm{};H)`$.

Apart from the linear operators $`C(t)`$ and $`D`$ equation (5) has the form of equations of 2D Navier -Stokes type; see Temam , Chapter 3, for which we have existence and uniqueness. Here 2D means that the conclusion of Lemma 3.6 is fulfilled which is responsible for a uniqueness theorem. By the regularity properties of the operators $`B,C(t)`$ and $`D`$ the same method as for the 2D Navier-Stokes equations ensures existence and uniqueness for (5). Thus we get the following main result in this section, about the well-posedness for 3D quasigeostrophic flows under random wind forcing on ocean surface.

###### Theorem 3.9.

(Well-posedness) Suppose that the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process $`\eta `$ defined in (2) is in $`L_{2,loc}(0,\mathrm{};H^2)`$. Then the 3D QGE equation (5) or (4) has a unique solution $`u(t)L_{2,loc}(0,\mathrm{};V)C([0,\mathrm{});H)`$.

###### Remark 3.10.

i) On account of Lemma 3.6 we can prove that $`u(t)`$ depends continuously on the initial conditions $`xH`$. This will be used later on.
ii) Due to Lemma 3.4 for $`t>0`$ and a bounded set of initial conditions in $`H`$ the image with respect to the solution operator $`u_0u(t)`$ is bounded in $`V`$. Hence the solution operator is compact for $`t>0`$.

## 4. The dynamical system of 3D quasigeostrophic flows

In this section we study the dynamical behavior of QGE (5). In the following we are going to describe the background perturbations defined on the boundary of $`O`$ which will influence the dynamical system generated by (5). We will have two different influences. The first perturbation is a white noise which models the weather or the small scale impact of the atmospheric motion through wind forcing on the surface. The other one is a periodic motion which serves as a model for the impact due to periodic rotation of the earth and thus periodic exposure of the earth to the solar radiation; see , Chapter 6 and , Chapter 11.
In the first part of this section we are going to explain a dynamical model of the boundary conditions.
We consider the elliptic differential equation

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}u=0,\frac{u}{n}=0\text{on }O_{,,0}\frac{u}{n}=fH^{k+\frac{1}{2}}(O_{,,2\pi })\dot{L}_2(O_{,,2\pi }).$$

On the other faces we have periodic boundary conditions. This equation has a unique solution; see Egorov and Shubin  Page 130f. The solution operator is a linear continuous operator with the image in $`H^{k+2}`$. We denote this operator by $`\stackrel{~}{G}(f)`$. $`H^{k+\frac{1}{2}}(O_{,,2\pi })`$ denotes a usual boundary space.

At first we consider the random part of the boundary conditions. Let $`W`$ be a continuous temporal Wiener process with values in a Hilbert space $`U=H^{2+\frac{1}{2}}(O_{,,2\pi })\dot{L}_2(O_{,,2\pi })`$ This Wiener process is defined for positive and negative times; see Arnold  Page 547. The covariance operator of $`W`$ is denoted by $`Q`$, which is a positive symmetric linear operator on $`U`$ with finite trace. The dynamics of $`W`$ is given by the metric dynamical system consisting of a probability space $`(\mathrm{\Omega },,)`$ and a flow $`\theta `$, $`(\mathrm{\Omega },,,\theta )`$ where $``$ is the Wiener measure with covariance $`Q`$ and $`\theta =(\theta _t)_t`$ is the flow of the Wiener shift:

$$W(,\theta _t\omega )=W(+t,\omega )W(t,\omega )\text{for }t.$$

The mapping $`\theta `$ is $`((),)`$–measurable and fulfills the property

(6)
$$\theta _{t+\tau }=\theta _t\theta _\tau ,t,\tau .$$

For instance, we can choose $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ to be the set of continuous functions $`C_0(,U)`$ which are zero at zero and for $``$ we choose the Borel-$`\sigma `$-algebra of $`C_0(,U)`$. Note that $``$ is ergodic with respect to $`\theta `$. Later on we have to restrict this metric dynamical system to fix particular dynamical properties.
We now show the existence of a solution of (2) satisfying particular properties. At first we show that the following problem has a stationary solution:

(7)
$$\eta _{1}^{}{}_{t}{}^{}=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta _1,\frac{\eta _1}{n}=0,(x,y)O_{,,0},\frac{\eta _1}{n}=\dot{W}(t),(x,y)O_{,,2\pi }$$

under periodic boundary conditions with respect to the other faces of the cube $`O`$ and a initial condition at time $`t=0`$. This solution will serve as a process which compensates the nonhomogeneous boundary conditions in (4). A similar problem has been considered in Da Prato and Zabczyk  Chapter 13 or .
In contrast to (7) we now consider boundary conditions which are defined to be homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions on $`O_{,,2\pi }`$. The solution of (7) with these boundary conditions generates an analytic $`C_0`$-semigroup $`(S(t))_{t0}`$. This semigroup has a generator, which will be denoted also by $`\nu A`$ where $`A`$ is equivalent to the operator introduced in the last section.
The following lemma allows us to define a stationary Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process which fulfills particular regularity assumptions. We notice that $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ maps continuously $`H^{\frac{5}{2}}(𝒪(,,2\pi ))`$ into $`VH^4`$ where

$$V=\{uH^1H:u(0,,)=u(2\pi ,,),u(,0,)=u(,2\pi ,)\}.$$

We also note that for our boundary conditions $`VH^2D(A)`$.

###### Lemma 4.1.

Let $`Q`$ be a linear operator of finite trace on $`U=H^{\frac{5}{2}}(O_{,,2\pi })H`$. We consider the elliptic differential operators with respect to the boundary conditions formulated in (3)

(8)
$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}u+(F_zu)_z,\{\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}u+(F_zu)_z\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}v+2(F_zv)_z+F_{zz}v+F_{zzz}u\hfill \end{array}$$

which are supposed to be generators of analytic $`C_0`$-semigroups of negative type. Then we have

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}AS(\tau )_{_2(U,H^2)}^2<\mathrm{},_0^{\mathrm{}}AS(\tau )_{_2(U,D(A^\beta ))}^2<\mathrm{},\beta <\frac{1}{4}.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`\stackrel{~}{e}_i`$ be a complete orthonormal base in $`U`$. Then $`\stackrel{~}{G}Q^{\frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{~}{e}_iH^4H`$. We now study the $`D_x,D_{xx},\mathrm{}D_{zz}`$-derivative of $`\stackrel{~}{G}Q^{\frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{~}{e}_i`$. All these expressions are periodic in $`x,y`$ directions. In addition, all these elements are contained in $`D(A^\eta ),\eta <\frac{3}{4}`$ This follows because we only have periodic and Neumann boundary conditions, see Da Prato and Zabczyk  Page 401. Since $`S(t)g`$ is the solution of a differential linear parabolic equation

(9)
$$\frac{dv}{dt}+\nu Av=0,v(0)=g.$$

we can differentiate the the solution with respect to $`D_x`$. The coefficients of the equation are independent of $`x`$. The function $`D_xS(t)g`$ fulfills the same equation as $`S(t)g`$ but with derived initial condition. Hence we have $`D_xS(t)g=S(t)D_xg`$. The regularity of $`D_xgD(A^\eta )`$ ensures that $`AD_xS(t)g_H`$ is well defined such that $`D_xS(t)gD(A)`$, see  Page 392:

(10)
$$AD_xS(\tau )g_H^2=AS(\tau )D_xg_H^2\frac{C^2}{t^{22\eta }}e^{2\alpha t}D_xg_{D(A^\eta )}^2t>0.$$

for $`g=\stackrel{~}{G}Q^{\frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{~}{e}_i`$, $`\alpha >0`$ and $`\eta (\frac{1}{2},\frac{3}{4})`$. But on $`D(A)`$ we can identify $`A`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ such that we can exchange $`A`$ and $`D_x`$. Integration of (10) from 0 to $`\mathrm{}`$ and summation over $`i`$ yields the desired estimate. Similarly, we can argue for the derivatives $`D_x,D_y,D_{yy},\mathrm{}`$.
Similar considerations allow us to prove the estimates for derivatives $`D_{zx},\mathrm{},D_{zz}`$. In contrast to the above formulae a derivative $`D_z`$ changes $`A`$ to an operator $`\widehat{A}`$ given in (9) with semigroup $`\widehat{S}(t)`$. The assumption (8 ensures that $`\widehat{S}(t)`$ is of negative type with our usual boundary conditions. We get

$$D_zAS(\tau )g_H^2=\widehat{A}D_zS(\tau )g_H^2=\widehat{A}\widehat{S}(\tau )D_zg_H^2\frac{\widehat{C}^2}{t^{22\eta }}e^{2\widehat{\alpha }t}D_zg_{D(\widehat{A}^\eta )}^2,t>0.$$

The same method gives us estimates in $`z`$-direction. Note that if we differentiate the coefficients of (9) twice in z direction one term without a second $`z`$ derivative appears. To take this term into account we need the system of differential operators in (8).

To obtain the second conclusion we use the estimate for $`\beta (0,\frac{1}{4})`$

$$AS(t)g_{D(A^\beta )}^2=A^\beta AS(t)g_H^2\frac{C^2}{t^{22\eta }}e^{2\alpha t}g_{D(A^{\beta +\eta })}^2.$$

and an appropriate $`\eta >\frac{1}{2}`$: $`\eta +\beta (\frac{1}{2},\frac{3}{4}),t>0`$. ∎

Note that if $`N(z)`$ (hence $`F(z)`$) is constant then the assumption about the generator is superflow.

###### Remark 4.2.

On account of Da Prato and Zabczyk  Chapter 13 there exists an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process

$$\eta _1(,\omega )=A_0^{}S(\tau )d\stackrel{~}{G}W(\tau ,\omega )L_{2,loc}(0,\mathrm{};H^2)$$

solving (7) with initial condition zero at $`t=0`$. $`\eta _1(t,\omega )`$ is periodic in $`x,y`$ directions.

Now we are going to show that $`\eta _1(,\omega )`$ has continuous paths in $`H`$.

###### Lemma 4.3.

There exists a continuous version in $`H`$ and in particular,

$$𝔼\underset{s[0,1]}{sup}\eta _1(s)_H^2<\mathrm{}.$$

###### Proof.

Due to Da Prato and Zabczyk  Theorem 5.9 and Remark 5.11 we have to check

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}\tau ^\gamma AS(\tau )\stackrel{~}{G}Q^{\frac{1}{2}}_{_2(U,H)}^2𝑑\tau <\mathrm{}$$

for some $`\gamma >0`$. The left hand side is equal to

(11)
$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\lambda _i^2Q^{\frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{~}{G}^{}e_i_H^2_0^te^{2\lambda _i\tau }\tau ^\gamma 𝑑\tau ,$$

see Da Prato and Zabczyk  Proposition 13.2.4 where $`(e_i)`$ is orthonormal base introduced above. For sufficiently small $`\gamma >0`$ we have a $`c(\gamma )>0`$:

$$\lambda _i^{2\beta }_0^t\tau ^\gamma e^{2\lambda _i\tau }𝑑\tau c(\gamma )_0^te^{2\lambda _i\tau }𝑑\tau .$$

Hence (11) can be estimated by

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}`$ $`\lambda _i^2Q^{\frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{~}{G}^{}e_i_H^2{\displaystyle _0^t}\tau ^\gamma e^{2\lambda _i\tau }𝑑\tau `$
$`c(\gamma ){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\lambda _i^{2+2\beta }Q^{\frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{~}{G}^{}e_i_H^2{\displaystyle _0^t}e^{2\lambda _i\tau }𝑑\tau =c(\gamma ){\displaystyle _0^t}AS(\tau )_{_2(U,D(A^\beta ))}^2𝑑\tau `$
which is finite by Lemma 4.1. ∎

We now are looking for a stationary process solving (7).

###### Lemma 4.4.

There exists a random variable $`\eta _1H`$ such that $`t\eta _1(\theta _t\omega )`$ solves (7).

###### Proof.

By the Fourier method we have $`S(t)_{H,H}^2e^{2\lambda _1t}`$. We obtain for $`n_1<n_2,n_1\mathrm{}`$

(12) $`\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝔼& \underset{s[0,1]}{sup}\eta _1(s+n_1,\theta _{n_1}\omega )\eta _1(s+n_2,\theta _{n_2}\omega )_H^2\hfill \\ & =𝔼\underset{s[0,1]}{sup}A{\displaystyle _0^{n_1+s}}S(n_1+s\tau )𝑑\stackrel{~}{G}W(\tau ,\theta _{n_1}\omega )\hfill \\ & A{\displaystyle _0^{n_2+s}}S(n_2+s\tau )𝑑\stackrel{~}{G}W(\tau ,\theta _{n_2}\omega )_H^2\hfill \end{array}`$
We can continue by a simple integral substitution, the $`(\theta _t)_t`$-invariance of $``$ and the semigroup property of $`S`$

$`=𝔼\underset{s[0,1]}{sup}A{\displaystyle _{n_1}^s}S(s\tau )𝑑\stackrel{~}{G}W(\tau ,\omega )A{\displaystyle _{n_2}^s}S(s\tau )𝑑\stackrel{~}{G}W(\tau ,\omega )_H^2`$
$`=𝔼\underset{s[0,1]}{sup}A{\displaystyle _{n_2}^{n_1}}S(s\tau )𝑑\stackrel{~}{G}W_H^2=𝔼\underset{s[0,1]}{sup}A{\displaystyle _{n_2+n_1}^0}S(n_1+s\tau )𝑑\stackrel{~}{G}W_H^2`$
$`\underset{s[0,1]}{sup}e^{2\lambda _1(n_1+s)}𝔼A{\displaystyle _{n_1+n_2}^0}S(\tau )𝑑\stackrel{~}{G}W(\tau ,\omega )_H^2`$
$`e^{2\lambda _1n_1}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}AS(\tau )\stackrel{~}{G}Q^{\frac{1}{2}}_{_2(U,H)}^2Ce^{2\lambda _1n_1}.`$
The finiteness of the last integral follows by Lemma 4.1 Hence $`\eta _1(+n,\theta _n\omega )`$ is $`L_2`$-convergent with respect to $`C([0,1];H)`$. This convergence is exponentially fast. Via Lemma 4.3 and the semigroup property the exponential convergence to zero of

(13)
$$𝔼\underset{s[0,1]}{sup}A_n^{n+s}S(s\tau )𝑑\stackrel{~}{G}W(\tau ,\omega )_H^2$$

for $`n\mathrm{}`$ is easily seen.
By the Borel and Cantelli Lemma there exists a set $`\mathrm{\Omega }^0\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of full measure such that for $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }^0`$ we have the above convergences $`\omega `$-wise. The same remains true on $`\mathrm{\Omega }^j`$ if we replace $`\omega `$ by $`\theta _j\omega `$ for $`j`$. The set $`_j\mathrm{\Omega }^j`$ is $`(\theta _t)_t`$-invariant and has a full measure.
We denote by $`\eta _1(\omega )`$ the $`\omega `$-wise limit of $`\eta _1(0+n,\theta _n\omega )`$ which exists on $`_j\mathrm{\Omega }^j`$. To see that $`\eta _1(0+n,\theta _n\theta _{\overline{t}}\omega )`$ is converging on $`_j\mathrm{\Omega }^j`$ we can restrict ourselves to $`\overline{t}[0,1]`$. In particular, if $`\overline{t}(1,0)`$, $`\theta _{\overline{t}}\omega `$ can be written as $`\theta _{1+\overline{t}}\theta _1\omega ,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}+\overline{t}(0,1)`$ for $`\overline{t}(1,0)`$. We can write

$`\eta _1(n,\theta _{n+\overline{t}}\omega )`$ $`=A{\displaystyle _{n+\overline{t}}^{\overline{t}}}S(\overline{t}\tau )𝑑\stackrel{~}{G}W(\tau ,\omega )`$
$`=A{\displaystyle _n^{\overline{t}}}S(\overline{t}\tau )𝑑\stackrel{~}{G}W(\tau ,\omega )A{\displaystyle _n^{n+\overline{t}}}S(\overline{t}\tau )𝑑\stackrel{~}{G}W(\tau ,\omega ).`$
By the above considerations the first term on the right hand side is convergent and the second term tends to zero by (13) using the semigroup property. Let $`\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ be the set of $`\omega `$’s such that $`\eta _1(n,\theta _n\omega )`$ converges $`\omega `$-wise. We have for $`t`$ that $`\theta _t\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_j\mathrm{\Omega }^j`$. Hence the $`(\theta _t)_t`$-invariant set $`_t\theta _t\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ contains a set of measure one. We can construct a new probability space if we consider the trace of $``$ and the restriction of $``$ to this new set $`_t\theta _t\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$. We will use for this new probability space the old notations.
To see that $`t\eta _1(\theta _t\omega )`$ solves (7) we consider $`\eta _1(\theta _t\omega )S(t)\eta _1(\omega )`$ which is a version of $`A_0^tS(t\tau )𝑑\stackrel{~}{G}W`$ such that by the variation of constants formulae

$$S(t)\eta _1(\omega )+A_0^tS(t\tau )𝑑\stackrel{~}{G}W(\tau ,\omega )=\eta _1(\theta _t\omega ),$$

see Da Prato and Zabcyk  (13.2.13). ∎

###### Remark 4.5.

Using the technique for the proof of the last lemma we can also show that there exists a $`(\theta _t)_t`$-invariant set of full measure such that $`t\eta _1(\theta _t\omega )`$ has paths in $`L_{2,loc}(0,\mathrm{};H^2)`$. Since the distribution of $`\eta _1`$ is a Gauß measure it can be derived that the stationary process $`\eta _1(\theta _{})`$ has trajectories in $`L_{4,loc}(0,\mathrm{};H^2H)`$, see Da Prato and Zabczyk  Corollary 2.17.

We now introduce the term tempered random variable. A random variable $`\xi `$ is called tempered if this random variable has a subexponential growth:

$$\underset{t\mathrm{},t𝕋}{lim\; sup}\frac{\mathrm{log}^+(\xi (\theta _t\omega ))}{|t|}=0.$$

In the case of an ergodic measure $``$, it is well known that there is only one alternative, i.e., the $`limsup`$ in the last formula is $`+\mathrm{}`$; see Arnold  Page 165, Proposition 4.1.3.

###### Lemma 4.6.

There exists a $`(\theta _t)_t`$-invariant set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1`$ of full $``$-measure such that for any $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_1`$ , $`\eta _1(\omega )`$ is well defined and

$$\underset{t\pm \mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{\mathrm{log}^+\eta _1(\theta _t\omega )_H}{t}=0$$

which means that the $`H`$ norm of $`\eta _1`$ is tempered.

###### Proof.

On account of (12) we have

$$𝔼\underset{s[0,1]}{sup}\eta _1(\theta _s\omega )_H<\mathrm{}.$$

Hence by the Birkhoff ergodic theorem, we have a $`(\theta _t)_t`$–invariant set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1\mathrm{\Omega }`$ such that

$$\underset{n\pm \mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{sup_{s[0,1]}\eta _1(\theta _{s+n}\omega )_H}{n}=0.$$

On the other hand for $`t>0`$:

$$\eta _1(\theta _t\omega )_H\underset{s[0,1]}{sup}\eta _1(\theta _{s+[t]}\omega )_H$$

such that

$$\underset{t\pm \mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{\eta _1(\theta _t\omega )_H}{t}=0.$$

and similarly for $`t<0`$, which is sufficient for the $`(\theta _t)_t`$–invariance of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1`$. ∎

Collecting our calculations we get

###### Theorem 4.7.

Let $`Q`$ be a linear operator on $`U=H^{\frac{5}{2}}(O_{,,2\pi })\dot{L}_2(O_{,,2\pi })`$ with finite trace. Then there exists a tempered random variable $`\eta _1`$ and a $`(\theta _t)_t`$-invariant set of full measure such that

$$t\eta _1(\theta _t\omega )C([0,\mathrm{});H)L_{4,loc}(0,\mathrm{};H^2H).$$

$`\eta _1(\omega )`$ is periodic in $`x,y`$ directions.

In a similar manner we can consider (7) with time-periodic boundary condition representing the impact of the earth’s rotation on the fluid :

(14)
$$\eta _{2}^{}{}_{t}{}^{}=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta _2,\frac{\eta _2}{n}=0,\text{on }O_{,,0},\frac{\eta _2}{n}=u_0\mathrm{sin}(2\pi t)\text{on }O_{,,2\pi }$$

for $`u_0H^{\frac{1}{2}}\dot{L}_2(O_{,,2\pi })`$ and (spatial) periodic boundary conditions on the other faces. We obtain without proof the following :

###### Lemma 4.8.

Suppose that $`u_0H^{\frac{1}{2}}(O_{,,2\pi })\dot{L}_2(O_{,,2\pi })`$. Then there exists a continuous periodic solution

$$t\eta _2(t)H^2$$

which satisfies (14). In particular, $`\eta _2(t)`$ is also periodic in $`x`$-$`y`$ directions.

The proof is based on the properties of the operator $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$.

Let $`\theta ^2=(\theta ^2)_t`$ be the shift operator $`\theta _t^2f()=f(t+)`$ for appropriate functions $`f`$. We consider the hull of $`u_0\mathrm{sin}t`$ with respect to $`\theta ^2`$:

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_2=\underset{t}{}\theta _t^2(u_0\mathrm{sin}(2\pi ))=\underset{t}{}u_0\mathrm{sin}(2\pi (t+))=\underset{t[0,2\pi )}{}u_0\mathrm{sin}(2\pi (t+)).$$

Summarizing, we have found a process $`\eta =\eta _1+\eta _2`$ which will serve as a model for the perturbation on the ocean surface.

After these preparations we can introduce a nonautonomous/random dynamical system. Let $`\theta `$ be a flow on a set $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ (such that (6) is fulfilled).

###### Definition 4.9.

A nonautonomous dynamical system $`\varphi `$ on a phase space $`H`$ with respect to a flow $`\theta `$ is a mapping

$$\varphi :𝕋^+\times \mathrm{\Omega }\times HH$$

fulfilling the cocycle property

$`\varphi (t+\tau ,\omega ,)`$ $`=\varphi (t,\theta _\tau \omega ,\varphi (\tau ,\omega ,))\text{for }t,\tau 𝕋^+`$
$`\varphi (0,\omega ,)`$ $`=\mathrm{id}_H`$
for $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`t,\tau 𝕋^+`$. Suppose that the flow $`\theta `$ is carried by a metric dynamical system and $`\varphi `$ is supposed to be measurable then $`\varphi `$ forms a random dynamical system.

This definition is due to Arnold  or Kloeden et. al.

###### Remark 4.10.

We now consider the flow $`\theta =(\theta ^1,\theta ^2)`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }^1\times \mathrm{\Omega }^2`$. By the global forward existence and uniqueness of the solution of (5) for $`\eta (\theta _t\omega )=\eta _1(\theta _t^1\omega _1)+\eta _2(\theta _t^2\omega _2),\omega =(\omega _1,\omega _2)\mathrm{\Omega }`$, the solution operator of (5), which maps an initial condition $`u_0H`$ and a sample point $`\omega `$ to the solution at time $`t`$, has the cocycle property for $`H=\dot{L}_2(O)`$. We will denote this solution operator by $`\varphi (t,\omega ,x)`$. Note that by the periodicity of $`\eta _2`$ the restriction of $`\varphi `$ on $``$ is a random dynamical system for any fixed $`\omega _2\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$. Indeed, $`\theta _i\omega =(\theta _i^1\omega _1,\omega _2)`$ which can be identified with $`\theta ^1`$ and which leaves $``$ invariant ($``$ is ergodic with respect to $`(\theta _i^1)_i`$).

###### Remark 4.11.

Another opportunity to get an example for a complete random dynamical system would be to equip $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$ with an ergodic measure. But in contrast to the fact that the daily or yearly rotation of the earth is well determined such a random ansatz would express that the beginning of these periods is rather random.

The main result of this article is the existence of an attractor for the nonautonomous dynamical system. This attractor will attract random sets in probability. Before we give the main theorem, we make some basic remarks on random sets.
Suppose that $`H`$ is a Polish space. A set function $`\omega D(\omega )`$ with closed and nonempty images is called a closed random set over $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_1,,)`$ if and only if there exists a countable number of random variables

$$\xi _i:(\mathrm{\Omega }_1,,)H,i$$

such that

$$D(\omega )=\overline{\underset{i}{}\xi _i(\omega )}$$

see Castaing and Valadier  Chapter 3.

A random set $`D`$ is called tempered if the random variable $`\mathrm{dist}_H(D(\omega ),\{0\})`$ is tempered where

$$\mathrm{dist}_H(A,B)=\underset{aA}{sup}\underset{bB}{inf}ab_H.$$

We now define the term random attractor.

###### Definition 4.12.

Let $`\varphi `$ be a random dynamical system over the metric dynamical system $`\theta `$. A tempered random set $`(A(\omega ))_{\omega \mathrm{\Omega }}`$ with compact and nonempty images $`A(\omega )`$ is called random attractor if

(15)
$$\varphi (t,\omega ,A(\omega ))=A(\theta _t\omega ),t𝕋^+$$

and for any random tempered closed random set $`D(\omega )`$:

(16)
$$()\underset{t\mathrm{},t𝕋^+}{lim}\mathrm{dist}_H(\overline{\varphi (t,\omega ,D(\omega ))},A(\theta _t\omega ))=0.$$

In the next section we will show that the dynamical system generated by (5) restricted to $`𝕋=`$ has such a random attractor. However, because of time-periodic perturbation, we do not have a random dynamical system but a nonautonomous dynamical system for $`𝕋=`$. Therefore we have to modify this conclusion for $`𝕋=`$ a little bit, and thus we obtain the following main result in this section.

###### Theorem 4.13.

There exists set function $`A=(A(\omega ))_{\omega \mathrm{\Omega }}`$ for the 3D QGE (5) under random plus time-periodic forcing on the ocean surface such that (15) (16)is satisfied for set functions $`D`$ with closed images and subsexponential growth of $`t\mathrm{dist}_H(D(\theta _t\omega ),\{0\})`$ with tempered restriction to $`(\theta _t)_t`$. Moreover, the mapping

$$tA(\theta _t\omega )$$

has a subexponential growth.

In the next section, we prove this main theorem 4.13.

## 5. Proof of the main theorem

The proof of the main theorem 4.13 in the last section is based on checking following conditions. We will consider the set of families of sets $`D`$ such that $`D(\omega )`$ is closed and nonempty and $`t\mathrm{dist}_H(D(\theta _t(\omega _1,\omega _2)),0)`$ has a subexponintially growth. If we consider $`D`$ with respect to the restriction of $`(\theta _t)_t`$ to $``$ family of sets $`D`$ is supposed to be tempered. The set of these set families is denoted by $`𝒟`$.

The following theorem states the existence of random attractors.

###### Theorem 5.1.

Suppose that $`\theta ^1`$ be a metric dynamical system and suppose that for $`\omega _1\mathrm{\Omega }_1,t^+`$ the mappings $`\varphi (t,\omega _1,)`$ are continuous and that there exists a tempered set $`B`$ having compact images which is absorbing:

(17)
$$\varphi (t,\theta _t^1\omega _1,D(\theta _t^1\omega _1))B(\omega _1)$$

for $`^+tt_0(D,\omega )`$, $`D`$ is supposed to be tempered. Then there exists a unique random attractor $`A`$ which is tempered.

The proof of this theorem can be found in Flandoli and Schmalfuß .

Now let us use this result to prove our main Theorem 4.13.

###### Proof.

Calculating the inner product in $`H`$ we obtain by Lemma 3.5, 3.7, 3.8.

(18)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill u(t)_H^2& +2\nu _0^tu(\tau )_V^2𝑑\tau =u_0_H^2+2\beta _0^tG(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta )_x\eta _x,u𝑑\tau \hfill \\ & u_0_H^2+\frac{\beta ^2}{\nu }_0^tG(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta (\theta _\tau \omega ))_x\eta (\theta _\tau \omega )_x_V^{}^2𝑑\tau +\nu _0^tu(\tau )_V^2𝑑\tau .\hfill \end{array}$$

Parallel to this inequality we consider the affine equation

(19)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \xi (t)& +\nu \lambda _1_0^t\xi (\tau )𝑑\tau \hfill \\ & =u_0_H^2+\frac{\beta ^2}{\nu }_0^tG(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta (\theta _\tau \omega ))_x\eta (\theta _\tau \omega )_x_V^{}^2𝑑\tau .\hfill \end{array}$$

The solution of this equation $`\xi (t,\omega ,u_0_H^2)`$ is a bound for $`u(t)_H^2`$. In addition, this equation has a unique forward and backward exponentially fast attracting solution

$$(\omega ,t)\xi ^{}(\theta _t\omega ),\xi ^{}(\omega )=\frac{\beta ^2}{\nu }_{\mathrm{}}^0e^{\nu \lambda _1\tau }G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta (\theta _\tau \omega ))_x\eta (\theta _\tau \omega )_x_V^{}^2𝑑\tau .$$

for $`t\mathrm{}`$ which follows by the variation of constants formulae.
To see the backward convergence uniform with respect to $`D`$ we must prove that

$$\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}\underset{u_0D(\theta _t\omega )}{sup}|\xi (t,\theta _t\omega ,u_0_H^2)\xi ^{}(\omega )|=0.$$

Because of

$$\xi ^{}(\omega )=\xi (t,\theta _t\omega ,\xi ^{}(\theta _t\omega )))$$

we have

$$\underset{u_0D(\theta _t\omega )}{sup}|\xi (t,\theta _t\omega ,u_0_H^2)\xi ^{}(\omega )|\underset{u_0D(\theta _t\omega )}{sup}|u_0_H^2\xi ^{}(\theta _t\omega )|e^{\lambda _1t}$$

which also follows by the variation of constants formulae. Since the first factor on the right hand side is only subexponentially growing the convergence conclusion follows for $`t\mathrm{}`$.
The forward convergence follows straightforwardly by the variation of constants formulae

$$|\underset{u_0D(\omega )}{sup}\xi (t,\omega ,u_0_H^2)\xi ^{}(\theta _t\omega )|e^{\lambda _1t}\underset{u_0D(\omega )}{sup}|u_0_H^2\xi ^{}(\omega )|$$

where $`\xi ^{}(\theta _t\omega )=\xi (t,\omega ,\xi ^{}(\omega ))`$. The mapping $`t\xi ^{}(\theta _t\omega )`$ is subexponentially growing. Indeed, we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{2\beta ^2}}\xi ^{}(\omega )`$ $`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^0}e^{\nu \lambda _1\tau }G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta _1(\theta _\tau \omega ))_x\eta _1(\theta _\tau \omega )_x_V^{}^2𝑑\tau `$
$`+{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^0}e^{\nu \lambda _1\tau }G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta _2(\theta _\tau \omega ))_x\eta _2(\theta _\tau \omega )_x_V^{}^2𝑑\tau .`$
The second term on the right hand side is bounded and the first is tempered, see Theorem 4.1 in . Since $`\eta _1_H`$ is tempered so is $`G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta _1)_x_V^{}`$
Hence the ball $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$ with center zero and radius $`2\xi ^{}(\omega )`$ forms an absorbing set (in the sense of (17)), $`\stackrel{~}{B}(\omega )𝒟`$. Plugging in the radius $`2\xi ^{}(\omega )`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$ into (19) for $`u_0_H^2`$ it is easily seen that $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$ is forward invariant:

$$\varphi (t,\omega ,\stackrel{~}{B}(\omega ))\stackrel{~}{B}(\theta _t\omega ).$$

Since for fixed $`\omega _2`$ the mapping $`\xi ^{}`$ is a random variable $`B`$ is a random set. On the other hand we can check that

$$B(\omega ):=\overline{\varphi (1,\theta _1\omega ,\stackrel{~}{B}(\theta _1\omega ))}\stackrel{~}{B}(\omega ).$$

Note that $`B`$ is compact because $`\varphi `$ is regularizing which follows by Remark 3.10 ii). We have seen that $`B`$ is forward and backward absorbing. This remains true if we restrict our random dynamical system to discrete time, see Remark 4.10. By the above inclusion we can derive $`B𝒟`$ since $`\stackrel{~}{B}𝒟`$. It follows also by the definition of $`B`$ that for fixed $`\overline{\omega }_2`$ the set $`B((\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))`$ is random set which is tempered.

The continuity of $`\varphi (t,\omega ,)`$ follows because we have the estimate from Lemma 3.6. However, we need this technique later on once more such that we are going to explain this technique: We have by Lemma 3.6 and the properties of $`C(t)`$ and $`D`$:

$`|B(u_1,u_1)B(u_2,u_2),u_1u_2|c_3u_1u_2_Hu_1u_2_Vu_1_V`$
$`C(t,u_1)C(t,u_2),u_1u_2=0`$
$`D(u_1)D(u_2),u_1u_2=0`$
Hence there exists a constant $`c_6`$ such that for two solutions $`u_1,u_2`$ with initial conditions $`u_{10},u_{20}`$

$$\frac{d}{dt}u_1(t)u_2(t)_H^2c_6(u_1(t)_V^2)u_1(t)u_2(t)_H^2.$$

It follows by the Gronwall lemma

(20)
$$u_1(t)u_2(t)_H^2u_{10}u_{20}_H^2e^{c_6_0^tu_1(\tau )_V^2𝑑\tau }$$

which gives the continuity of $`\varphi (t,\omega ,)`$.
We have checked all assumptions of the above theorem such that the discrete random dynamical system has a random attractor $`A(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2)`$ for some fixed $`\overline{\omega }_2`$ with respect to the restricted discrete random dynamical system. We now extend the definition of $`A`$ to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$. We set:

$$A(\theta _t(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))=\varphi (t,(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2),A(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))\text{for }t^+$$

which is invariant in the sense of (15). Note that by the cocycle property this definition is correct. We show convergence (16):

$$()\underset{t\mathrm{},t^+}{lim}\mathrm{dist}_H(\overline{\varphi (t,(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2),D((\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2)))},A(\theta _t(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2)))=0.$$

for $`D𝒟`$ and any $`\overline{\omega }_2\mathrm{\Omega }_2`$. Since $`B(\omega )`$ is a forward absorbing and forward invariant set for any $`D𝒟`$ it remains to check the convergence conclusion for $`D=B`$. On account of (18) we can notice for fixed $`\overline{\omega }_2`$ and $`u_1=\varphi (t,(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2),y)`$

$`\underset{yB((\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))}{sup}`$ $`\nu {\displaystyle _0^1}\varphi (\tau ,(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2),y)_V^2𝑑\tau `$
$`2\xi ^{}(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2)+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta ^2}{\nu }}{\displaystyle _0^1}G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta (\theta _\tau (\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2)))_x\eta (\theta _\tau (\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))_x_V^{}^2𝑑\tau .`$
With respect to (20) we have an appropriate constant $`c_7>0`$:

$`\underset{xB((\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))}{sup}e^{c_6_0^t\varphi (\tau ,(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2),x)_V^2𝑑\tau }`$
$`e^{c_7(\xi ^{}(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2)+_0^1G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta (\theta _\tau (\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))_x\eta (\theta _\tau (\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))_x_V^{}^2d\tau )}=:Y((\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))`$
for $`t[0,1]`$. The mapping

$$(\omega _1,n)Y((\theta _n\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))$$

defines a stationary process. We obtain by (20):

$`\underset{\tau [0,1]}{sup}`$ $`\mathrm{dist}_H(\varphi (\tau +n,\omega ,B((\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2)),A(\theta _{\tau +n}(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2)))`$
$`\mathrm{dist}_H(\varphi (n,(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2),B((\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2)),A((\theta _n^1\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2)))Y((\theta _n^1\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))^{\frac{1}{2}}.`$
Since the first factor of the right hand side tends to zero in probability the product of the right hand side also tends to zero in probability which gives the convergence conclusion (16).
To obtain the subexponential growth of

$$tA(\theta _t(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))$$

we need that $`Y`$ is tempered with respect to the restricted flow $`(\theta _t)_t`$. Due to Arnold  Proposition 4.1.3 it is sufficient to show that

$$𝔼\xi ^{}(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2)<\mathrm{},𝔼_0^1G(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\eta (\theta _{\tau +s}(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2)))_x\eta (\theta _{\tau +s}(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))_x_V^{}^2d\tau <\mathrm{}$$

which can be derived from Lemma 4.3. Consequently,

$$\underset{xA(\theta _t(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))}{sup}x_HY((\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{diam}(A((\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2)))+\underset{xA((\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2))}{sup}x_H,t[0,1]$$

by the triangle inequality. We have used that the product of two tempered random variables is tempered which gives the general convergence conclusion of the main theorem 4.13 since $`A(\omega _1,\overline{\omega }_2)`$ is $`(\theta _t)_t`$-tempered. ∎

## 6. Summary

We have studied the 3D baroclinic quasigeostrophic flow model under random wind forcing and time-periodic fluctuations on fluid boundary, i.e., on the interface between the oceans and the atmosphere. The time-periodic fluctuations are due to periodic rotation of the earth and thus periodic exposure of the earth to the solar radiation. We have established the well-posedness of the baroclinic quasigeostrophic flow model in the state space (Theorem 3.9), and we have demonstrated the existence of the random attractors (Theorem 4.13), again in the state space. We have also discussed the relevance of our results to climate modeling.

Acknowledgement. A part of this work was done at the Oberwolfach Mathematical Research Institute supported by Volkswagen Stiftung while the authors were Research in Pairs Fellows. This work was partly supported by the NSF Grant DMS-9973204.