Theorem 4.1.
Suppose that
${\rho}^{0}\in \mathcal{P}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{3}\right)$
with
$0<m\le {\rho}^{0}\le M$
, and belongs to
${C}^{\alpha}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{3}\right)$
for some
$\alpha >0$
. From Theorem 3.3 , for some
$T>0$
there exists a solution
$\overline{\rho}$
to
$SG$
in
${L}^{\infty}\left(\right[0,T],{C}^{\alpha}({\mathbb{T}}^{3}\left)\right)$
.
Then every solution of
$SG$
in
${L}^{\infty}\left(\right[0,{T}^{\prime}],{C}^{\beta}({\mathbb{T}}^{3}\left)\right)$
for
${T}^{\prime}>0,\beta >0$
with same initial data coincides with
$\overline{\rho}$
on
$[0,inf\{T,{T}^{\prime}\left\}\right]$
.
Remark 1: The uniqueness of weak solutions is still an open question.
Remark 2: Our proof of uniqueness is thus valid in a smaller class of solutions than the one found in the previous section, the reason is the following:
during the course of the proof, we will need to solve a MongeAmpere equation, whose righthand side is a function of the second derivatives of the solution of another MongeAmpere equation. In Theorem
3.1 , if
$u$
is solution to ( 7 ) with a right hand side satisfying ( 8 ), although
$u\in {C}^{2}$
, it is not clear that the second derivatives of
$u$
satisfy ( 8 ). Actually, it is even known to be wrong in the case of the Laplacian (for a precise discussion on the subject, the reader may refer to [
?]
). However, from Theorem 4.3 below, if
$\rho \in {C}^{\alpha}$
then
$u\in {C}^{2,\alpha}$
.
What we actually need is a continuity condition on the right hand side of (
7 ) such that the second derivative of the solution
$u$
satisfies ( 8 ). This may be a weaker condition than Holder continuity, however the proof would not be affected, therefore it is enough to give it under the present form.
Proof of Theorem 4.1 Let
${\rho}_{1}$
and
${\rho}_{2}$
be two solutions of ( 3 , 4 , 5 ), in
${L}^{\infty}\left(\right[0,T],{C}^{\beta}({\mathbb{T}}^{3}\left)\right)$
that coincide at time 0. Let
${X}_{1},{X}_{2}$
be the two corresponding Lagrangian solutions, (i.e.
solutions of ( 1 , 2 )). The velocity field being
${C}^{1}$
, for all
$t\in [0,T]$
,
${X}_{1}(t,\cdot )$
and
${X}_{2}(t,\cdot )$
are both
${C}^{1}$
diffeomorphisms of
${\mathbb{T}}^{d}$
.
We call
${\mathbf{v}}_{1}$
(resp.
${\mathbf{v}}_{2}$
) the velocity field associated to
${X}_{1}$
(resp.
${X}_{2}$
),
${\mathbf{v}}_{i}(t,x)=[\nabla {\Psi}_{i}(t,x)x{]}^{\perp},i=1,2$
. We have
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\partial}_{t}({X}_{1}{X}_{2})& =& {\mathbf{v}}_{1}\left({X}_{1}\right){\mathbf{v}}_{2}\left({X}_{2}\right)\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& \left({\mathbf{v}}_{1}\right({X}_{1}){\mathbf{v}}_{1}({X}_{2}\left)\right)+\left({\mathbf{v}}_{1}\right({X}_{2}){\mathbf{v}}_{2}({X}_{2}\left)\right).\end{array}$$  
We want to obtain a Gronwall type inequality for
$\parallel {X}_{1}{X}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}$
. Since
${\mathbf{v}}_{1}$
is uniformly Lipschitz in space (from Theorem 3.3 ), the first bracket is estimated in
${L}^{2}$
norm by
$C\parallel {X}_{1}{X}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}$
.
We now need to estimate the second term. We first have that
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\int \left{\mathbf{v}}_{1}\right({X}_{2}){\mathbf{v}}_{2}({X}_{2}){}^{2}=\int {\rho}_{2}\nabla {\Psi}_{1}\nabla {\Psi}_{2}{}^{2},& & \end{array}$$  
and since
${\rho}_{2}$
is bounded, we need to estimate
$\parallel \nabla {\Psi}_{1}\nabla {\Psi}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}$
. This will be done in the following Proposition:
Proposition 4.2.
Let
${X}_{1},{X}_{2}$
be mappings from
${\mathbb{T}}^{d}$
into itself, such that the densities
${\rho}_{i}={X}_{i\#}dx,i=1,2$
are in
${C}^{\alpha}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{d}\right)$
for some
$\alpha >0$
, and satisfy
$0<m\le {\rho}_{i}\le M$
. Let
${\Psi}_{i},i=1,2$
be convex such that
$$\begin{array}{ccc}det{D}^{2}{\Psi}_{i}={\rho}_{i}& & \end{array}$$  
in the sense of Theorem 1.1 , i.e.
${\Psi}_{i}=\Psi \left[{\rho}_{i}\right]$
. Then
$$\parallel \nabla {\Psi}_{1}\nabla {\Psi}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}\le C\parallel {X}_{1}{X}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}},$$
where
$C$
depends on
$\alpha $
(the Holder index of
${\rho}_{i}$
),
$\parallel {\rho}_{i}{\parallel}_{{C}^{\alpha}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{d}\right)}$
,
$m$
and
$M$
.
Before giving a proof of this result, we conclude the proof of the Theorem 4.1 . The Proposition 4.2 implies immediately that
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\parallel {\partial}_{t}({X}_{1}{X}_{2}){\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}\le C\parallel {X}_{1}{X}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}},& & \end{array}$$  
and we conclude the proof of the Theorem by a standard Gronwall lemma.
$\square $
4.2 Energy estimates along Wasserstein geodesics: Proof of Proposition 4.2 .
In the proof of this result we will need the following result on optimal transportation of measures by gradient of convex functions:
Theorem 4.3 (Brenier, [?] , McCann, [?] , CorderoErausquin, [?] , Caffarelli,[?] ).
Let
${\rho}_{1}$
,
${\rho}_{2}$
be two probability measures on
${\mathbb{T}}^{d}$
, such that
${\rho}_{1}$
is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure.

1.
There exists a unique up to a constant convex function
$\phi $
such that
$\phi \cdot {}^{2}/2$
is
${\mathbb{Z}}^{d}$
periodic, satisfying
$\nabla {\phi}_{\#}{\rho}_{1}={\rho}_{2}$
.

2.
The map
$\nabla \phi $
is the solution of the minimization problem
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{inf}_{{T}_{\#}{\rho}_{1}={\rho}_{2}}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{d}}{\rho}_{1}\left(x\right)\leftT\right(x)x{}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{d}}^{2}dx,& & \end{array}$$ 
(12)

and for all
$x\in {\mathbb{R}}^{d}$
,
$\nabla \phi (x)x{}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{d}}=\nabla \phi \left(x\right)x{}_{{\mathbb{R}}^{d}}$
.

3.
If
${\rho}_{1}$
,
${\rho}_{2}$
are strictly positive and belong to
${C}^{\alpha}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{d}\right)$
for some
$\alpha >0$
then
$\phi \in {C}^{2,\alpha}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{d}\right)$
and satisfies pointwise
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\rho}_{2}(\nabla \phi )det{D}^{2}\phi ={\rho}_{1}.& & \end{array}$$  
For complete references on the optimal transportation problem ( 12 ) and its applications, the reader can refer to [?] .
Remark 1: the expression
$\cdot {}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{d}}$
denotes the Riemannian distance on the flat torus, whereas
$\cdot {}_{{\mathbb{R}}^{d}}$
is the Euclidian distance on
${\mathbb{R}}^{d}$
. The second assertion of point 2 means that, for all
$x\in {\mathbb{R}}^{d}$
,
$\nabla \phi (x)x\le diam\left({\mathbb{T}}^{d}\right)=\sqrt{d}/2$
.
Remark 2: Here again, note that since
$\phi \cdot {}^{2}/2$
is periodic, the map
$x\mapsto \nabla \phi \left(x\right)$
is compatible with the equivalence classes of
${\mathbb{R}}^{d}/{\mathbb{Z}}^{d}$
, and therefore is defined without ambiguity on
${\mathbb{T}}^{d}$
.
Wasserstein geodesics between probability measures In this part we use results from [
?]
, [
?]
. Using Theorem 4.3 , we consider the unique (up to a constant) convex potential
$\phi $
such that
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \nabla {\phi}_{\#}{\rho}_{1}={\rho}_{2},\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \phi \cdot {}^{2}/2\text{is}{\mathbb{Z}}^{d}\text{periodic}.\end{array}$$  
We consider, for
$\theta \in [1,2]$
,
${\phi}_{\theta}$
defined by
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\phi}_{\theta}=(2\theta )\frac{x{}^{2}}{2}+(\theta 1)\phi .& & \end{array}$$  
We also consider, for
$\theta \in [1,2]$
,
${\rho}_{\theta}$
defined by
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\rho}_{\theta}=\nabla {\phi}_{\theta \#}{\rho}_{1}.& & \end{array}$$  
Then
${\rho}_{\theta}$
interpolates between
${\rho}_{1}$
and
${\rho}_{2}$
. This interpolation has been introduced in [
?]
and [
?]
as the time continuous formulation of the MongeKantorovitch mass transfer. In this construction, a velocity field
${v}_{\theta}$
is defined
$d{\rho}_{\theta}$
a.e. as follows:
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\forall f\in {C}^{0}({\mathbb{T}}^{d};{\mathbb{R}}^{d}),\int {\rho}_{\theta}{v}_{\theta}\cdot f=\int {\rho}_{1}f(\nabla {\phi}_{\theta})\cdot {\partial}_{\theta}\nabla {\phi}_{\theta}.& & \end{array}$$ 
(13)

It is easily checked that the pair
${\rho}_{\theta},{v}_{\theta}$
satisfies
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\partial}_{\theta}{\rho}_{\theta}+\nabla \cdot \left({\rho}_{\theta}{v}_{\theta}\right)=0,& & \end{array}$$  
and for any
$\theta \in [1,2]$
, we have (see [
?]
):
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{1}{2}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{d}}{\rho}_{\theta}{v}_{\theta}{}^{2}=\frac{1}{2}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{d}}{\rho}_{1}\nabla \phi \left(x\right)x{}^{2}={W}_{2}^{2}({\rho}_{1},{\rho}_{2}),& & \end{array}$$  
where
${W}_{2}({\rho}_{1},{\rho}_{2})$
is the Wasserstein distance between
${\rho}_{1}$
and
${\rho}_{2}$
, defined by
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{W}_{2}^{2}({\rho}_{1},{\rho}_{2})={inf}_{{T}_{\#}{\rho}_{1}={\rho}_{2}}\left\{\int {\rho}_{1}\left(x\right)\leftT\right(x)x{}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{d}}^{2}\right\}.& & \end{array}$$  
The Wasserstein distance can also be formulated as follows:
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{W}_{2}^{2}({\rho}_{1},{\rho}_{2})={inf}_{{Y}_{1},{Y}_{2}}\left\{{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{d}}{Y}_{1}{Y}_{2}{}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{d}}^{2}\right\}& & \end{array}$$  
where the infimum is performed over all maps
${Y}_{1},{Y}_{2}:{\mathbb{T}}^{d}\mapsto {\mathbb{T}}^{d}$
such that
${Y}_{i\#}dx={\rho}_{i},i=1,2$
. From this definition we have easily
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{W}_{2}^{2}({\rho}_{1},{\rho}_{2})\le \int \left{X}_{2}\right(t,a){X}_{1}(t,a){}^{2}da,& & \end{array}$$  
and it follows that, for every
$\theta \in [1,2]$
,
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{d}}{\rho}_{\theta}{v}_{\theta}{}^{2}={W}_{2}^{2}({\rho}_{1},{\rho}_{2})\le \parallel {X}_{2}{X}_{1}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}.& & \end{array}$$ 
(14)

Regularity of the interpolant measure
${\rho}_{\theta}$
From Theorem 4.3 , for
${\rho}_{1},{\rho}_{2}\in {C}^{\beta}$
and pinched between the positive postive constants
$m$
and
$M$
, we know that
$\phi \in {C}^{2,\beta}$
and satisfies
$$\begin{array}{ccc}det{D}^{2}\phi =\frac{{\rho}_{1}}{{\rho}_{2}(\nabla \phi )}.& & \end{array}$$  
We now estimate
${\rho}_{\theta}={\rho}_{1}[det{D}^{2}{\phi}_{\theta}{]}^{1}$
. From the concavity of
$log(det(\cdot \left)\right)$
on symmetric positive matrices, we have
$$\begin{array}{ccc}det{D}^{2}{\phi}_{\theta}& =& det\left(\right(2\theta )I+(\theta 1\left){D}^{2}\phi \right)\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& \ge & [det{D}^{2}\phi {]}^{\theta 1}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& \ge & \frac{m}{M}.\end{array}$$  
Moreover, since
$\phi \in {C}^{2}$
,
$det{D}^{2}{\phi}_{\theta}$
is bounded by above. Thus
${\rho}_{\theta}$
is uniformly bounded away from 0 and infinity, and uniformly Holder continuous.
Final energy estimate If we consider, for every
$\theta \in [1,2]$
,
${\Psi}_{\theta}$
solution of
$$\begin{array}{ccc}det{D}^{2}{\Psi}_{\theta}={\rho}_{\theta},& & \end{array}$$ 
(15)

in the sense of Theorem 1.2 , then
${\Psi}_{\theta}$
interpolates between
${\Psi}_{1}$
and
${\Psi}_{2}$
, and
${\Psi}_{\theta}\in {C}^{2,\beta}$
uniformly, from the regularity of
${\rho}_{\theta}$
. We will estimate
${\partial}_{\theta}\nabla {\Psi}_{\theta}$
by differentiating ( 15 ) with respect to
$\theta $
: for
$M,N$
two
$d\times d$
matrices,
$t\in \mathbb{R}$
, we recall that
$$det(M+tN)=detM+t(trace{M}_{co}^{t}N)+o\left(t\right),$$
where
${M}_{co}$
is the comatrix (or matrix of cofactors) of
$M$
. Moreover, for any
$f\in {C}^{2}({\mathbb{R}}^{d};\mathbb{R})$
, if
$M$
is the comatrix of
${D}^{2}f$
, it is a common fact that
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\forall j\in [1..d],{\sum}_{i=1}^{d}{\partial}_{i}{M}_{ij}\equiv 0.& & \end{array}$$ 
(16)

Hence, denoting
${M}_{\theta}$
the comatrix of
${D}^{2}{\Psi}_{\theta}$
, we obtain that
${\partial}_{\theta}{\Psi}_{\theta}$
satisfies
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\nabla \cdot ({M}_{\theta}\nabla {\partial}_{\theta}{\Psi}_{\theta})& =& {\partial}_{\theta}{\rho}_{\theta}\left(t\right)\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& \nabla \cdot \left({\rho}_{\theta}{v}_{\theta}\right).\end{array}$$ 
(17)

From the
${C}^{2,\beta}$
regularity of
${\Psi}_{\theta}$
,
${D}^{2}{\Psi}_{\theta}$
is a
${C}^{\beta}$
smooth, positive definite matrix, and its comatrix as well. Thus the problem ( 17 ) is uniformly elliptic.
If we multiply by
${\partial}_{\theta}{\Psi}_{\theta}$
, and integrate by parts we obtain
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\int {\nabla}^{t}{\partial}_{\theta}{\Psi}_{\theta}{M}_{\theta}\nabla {\partial}_{\theta}{\Psi}_{\theta}=\int \nabla {\partial}_{\theta}{\Psi}_{\theta}\cdot {v}_{\theta}{\rho}_{\theta}.& & \end{array}$$  
Using that
${M}_{\theta}\ge \lambda I$
for some
$\lambda >0$
, and combining with the inequality ( 14 ) above, we obtain
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\parallel \nabla {\partial}_{\theta}{\Psi}_{\theta}\left(t\right){\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}& \le & {\lambda}^{1}\parallel {\rho}_{\theta}{v}_{\theta}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& \le & {\lambda}^{1}\parallel {X}_{2}{X}_{1}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}{\left({sup}_{\theta}\parallel {\rho}_{\theta}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}\right)}^{1/2}.\end{array}$$  
The constant
${\lambda}^{1}$
depends on
$m,M,\beta ,\{\parallel {\rho}_{i}{\parallel}_{{C}^{\beta}},i=1,2\}$
, and is thus bounded under our present assumptions. We have already seen that
${\rho}_{\theta}$
is uniformly bounded, and we finally obtain that
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\parallel \nabla {\Psi}_{1}\nabla {\Psi}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}\le C\parallel {X}_{1}{X}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}},& & \end{array}$$ 
(18)

this ends the proof of Proposition 4.2 .
$\square $
.
Remark 1. In [
?]
, the author obtains also (weaker) estimates of the type of Proposition 4.2 , for discontinuous densities
${\rho}_{1},{\rho}_{2}$
.
5 Uniqueness of solutions to the 2d Euler equations with bounded vorticity: a new proof
This proof adapts easily to the case of 2d Euler equation with bounded vorticity, giving a new proof of the uniqueness part in Youdovich’s theorem.
We start now from the following system:
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\partial}_{t}\rho +\nabla {\psi}^{\perp}\cdot \nabla \rho =0,\end{array}$$ 
(19)

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \rho =\Delta \psi ,\end{array}$$ 
(20)

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \rho (t=0)={\rho}^{0}.\end{array}$$ 
(21)

For simplicity, we restrict ourselves to the periodic case, i.e.
$x\in {\mathbb{T}}^{d}$
,
$\rho ,\psi $
periodic, this implies that
$\rho $
has total mass equal to 0. We reprove the following classical result:
Theorem 5.1 (Youdovich, [?] ).
Given an initial data
${\rho}^{0}\in {L}^{\infty}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{2}\right)$
satisfying
${\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{\rho}^{0}=0$
, there exists a unique solution to ( 19 , 20 , 21 ) such that
$\rho $
belongs to
${L}_{loc}^{\infty}({\mathbb{R}}^{+}\times {\mathbb{T}}^{2})$
.
Proof of Theorem 5.1 We consider two solutions
${\rho}_{1},{\psi}_{1}$
and
${\rho}_{2},{\psi}_{2}$
, such that
${\rho}_{i},i=1,2$
are bounded in
${L}^{\infty}\left(\right[0,T]\times {\mathbb{T}}^{d})$
. In this case the velocity fields
${\mathbf{v}}_{i}=\nabla {\psi}_{i}^{\perp}$
both satisfy
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\forall (x,y)\in {\mathbb{T}}^{2},xy\le \frac{1}{2},\left{\mathbf{v}}_{i}\right(x){\mathbf{v}}_{i}(y\left)\right\le Cxylog\frac{1}{xy}.& & \end{array}$$  
This implies that the flows
$(t,x)\mapsto {X}_{i}(t,x)$
associated to the velocity fields
${v}_{i}=\nabla {\psi}_{i}^{\perp}$
are Holder continuous, and measure preserving. Moreover, one has, for all
$t\in [0,T]$
,
${\rho}_{i}\left(t\right)={X}_{i}(t{)}_{\#}{\rho}^{0}$
.
Applying the same technique as before, we need to estimate
$\parallel \nabla {\psi}_{1}\nabla {\psi}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{2}\right)}$
in terms of
$\parallel {X}_{1}{X}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{2}\right)}$
. In the present case, the energy estimate of Proposition 4.2 will hold under the weaker assumptions that the two densities are bounded.
Proposition 5.2.
Let
${X}_{1},{X}_{2}$
be mappings from
${\mathbb{T}}^{d}$
into itself, let
${\rho}^{0}$
be a bounded measure with a density in
${L}^{\infty}$
with respect to the Lebsgue measure, and with
${\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{d}}{\rho}^{0}=0$
. Let
${\rho}_{i}={X}_{i\#}{\rho}^{0},i=1,2$
. Let
${\psi}_{i},i=1,2$
be periodic solutions of
$\Delta {\psi}_{i}={\rho}_{i},i=1,2$
, then we have
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\parallel \nabla {\psi}_{1}\nabla {\psi}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{d}\right)}\le {\left(2\parallel {\rho}^{0}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}max\{\parallel {\rho}_{1}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}},\parallel {\rho}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}\}\right)}^{1/2}\parallel {X}_{1}{X}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{d}\right)}.& & \end{array}$$  
Remark: In other words, this proposition shows that for
${\rho}_{1},{\rho}_{2}$
bounded, the
${H}^{1}$
norm of
${\rho}_{1}{\rho}_{2}$
is controlled by some ’generalized’ (since here we have unsigned measures) Wasserstein distance between
${\rho}_{1}$
and
${\rho}_{2}$
.
To conclude the proof of Theorem
5.1 , note first that for all
$C>0$
, we can take
$T$
small enough so that
$\parallel {X}_{2}{X}_{1}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}\left(\right[0,T]\times {\mathbb{T}}^{2})}\le C$
. Now we have for the difference
${X}_{1}{X}_{2}$
, as long as
${X}_{1}{X}_{2}\le 1/2$
,
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \parallel {\partial}_{t}({X}_{1}{X}_{2}){\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& \le & \parallel \nabla {\psi}_{1}\left({X}_{1}\right)\nabla {\psi}_{1}\left({X}_{2}\right){\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}+\parallel \nabla {\psi}_{1}\left({X}_{2}\right)\nabla {\psi}_{2}\left({X}_{2}\right){\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& \le & {C}_{1}\parallel {X}_{1}{X}_{2}log\left(\right{X}_{1}{X}_{2}\left\right){\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}+{C}_{2}\parallel {X}_{1}{X}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}},\end{array}$$  
where, to evaluate the second term of the second line, we have used the fact that
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\parallel \nabla {\psi}_{1}\left({X}_{2}\right)\nabla {\psi}_{2}\left({X}_{2}\right){\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}=\parallel \nabla {\psi}_{1}\nabla {\psi}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}},& & \end{array}$$  
and then applied Proposition 5.2 .
We just need to evaluate
$\parallel {X}_{1}{X}_{2}log\left(\right{X}_{1}{X}_{2}\left\right){\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}$
. We take
$T$
small enough so that
$\parallel {X}_{2}{X}_{1}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}\left(\right[0,T]\times {\mathbb{T}}^{2})}\le 1/e$
and notice that
$x\mapsto x{log}^{2}x$
is concave for
$0\le x\le 1/e$
, therefore by Jensen’s inequality we have
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{X}_{2}{X}_{2}{}^{2}{log}^{2}({X}_{1}{X}_{2})\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& \frac{1}{4}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{X}_{2}{X}_{2}{}^{2}{log}^{2}({X}_{1}{X}_{2}{}^{2})\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& \le & \frac{1}{4}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{X}_{2}{X}_{1}{}^{2}{log}^{2}\left({\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{X}_{2}{X}_{1}{}^{2}\right),\end{array}$$  
and some elementary computations finally yield
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\partial}_{t}\parallel {X}_{2}{X}_{1}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}\le C\parallel {X}_{2}{X}_{1}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}log\frac{1}{\parallel {X}_{2}{X}_{1}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}}.& & \end{array}$$  
The conclusion
${X}_{1}\equiv {X}_{2}$
follows then by standard arguments.
5.1 Energy estimates along Wasserstein geodesic: Proof of Proposition 5.2
The proof of this proposition is very close to the proof of Proposition 4.2 , and we will only sketch it, insisting on the specific points. Here the densities
${\rho}_{i}$
can not be of constant sign, since their mean value is zero, hence we introduce
${\rho}^{0,+}$
(resp.
${\rho}^{0,}$
) the positive (resp. negative) part of
${\rho}^{0}$
. Then we introduce
${\rho}_{i}^{\pm}={X}_{i\#}{\rho}^{0,\pm}$
. Note that if the mappings
${X}_{i}$
were injective, (which is the case in our present situation) we would have
${\rho}_{i}^{\pm}$
that coincides with the positive/negative parts of
${\rho}_{i}$
, but this can be wrong if
${X}_{i}$
is not injective. However what remains is that
${\rho}_{i}={\rho}_{i}^{+}{\rho}_{i}^{}$
. Now,
${\rho}_{i}^{\pm},i=1,2$
are 4 positive measures of total mass equal to say
$M$
, with
$M<\infty $
.
Wasserstein geodesic We interpolate between the positive parts
${\rho}_{i}^{+}$
, and the negative part is handled in the same way. As before we introduce the density
${\rho}_{\theta}^{+}\left(t\right)$
that interpolates between
${\rho}_{1}^{+}\left(t\right)$
and
${\rho}_{2}^{+}\left(t\right)$
. In this interpolation, we consider
${v}_{\theta}^{+}$
such that
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\partial}_{\theta}{\rho}_{\theta}^{+}+\nabla \cdot \left({\rho}_{\theta}^{+}{v}_{\theta}^{+}\right)=0,& & \end{array}$$  
and we introduce as well
${\rho}_{\theta}^{},{v}_{\theta}^{}$
. Then
${\rho}_{\theta}={\rho}_{\theta}^{+}{\rho}_{\theta}^{}$
has mean value 0. Let the potential
${\psi}_{\theta}$
be solution to
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\Delta {\psi}_{\theta}={\rho}_{\theta}.& & \end{array}$$ 
(22)

Note that
${\rho}_{\theta}$
has mean value zero therefore this equation is well posed on
${\mathbb{T}}^{2}$
, moreover
${\psi}_{\theta}$
interpolates between
${\psi}_{1}$
and
${\psi}_{2}$
.
Bound on the interpolant measure
${\rho}_{\theta}$
Instead of interpolating between two smooth densities, we interpolate between bounded densities, and use the following result from [
?]
:
Proposition 5.3 (McCann, [?] ).
Let
${\rho}_{\theta}^{+}$
be the Wasserstein geodesic linking
${\rho}_{1}^{+}$
to
${\rho}_{2}^{+}$
defined above. Then, for all
$\theta \in [1,2]$
,
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\parallel {\rho}_{\theta}^{+}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}\le max\left\{\parallel {\rho}_{1}^{+}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}},\parallel {\rho}_{2}^{+}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}\right\}.& & \end{array}$$  
The same holds for
${\rho}_{i}^{},{\rho}_{\theta}^{}$
.
Remark: This property is often referred to as ’displacement convexity’.
Energy estimates Now by differentiating ( 22 ) with respect to
$\theta $
, we obtain
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\Delta {\partial}_{\theta}{\psi}_{\theta}={\partial}_{\theta}{\rho}_{\theta}=\nabla \cdot ({\rho}_{\theta}^{+}{v}_{\theta}^{+}{\rho}_{\theta}^{}{v}_{\theta}^{}),& & \end{array}$$ 
(23)

with
${v}_{\theta}^{\pm}$
the interpolating velocity defined as in ( 13 ), and satisfying for all
$\theta \in [1,2]$
,
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\int {\rho}_{\theta}^{\pm}{v}_{\theta}^{\pm}{}^{2}={W}_{2}^{2}({\rho}_{1}^{\pm}\left(t\right),{\rho}_{2}^{\pm}\left(t\right)).& & \end{array}$$  
Multiplying ( 23 ) by
${\partial}_{\theta}{\psi}_{\theta}$
, and integrating over
$\theta \in [1,2]$
, we obtain
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\parallel \nabla {\psi}_{1}\nabla {\psi}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{d}\right)}& \le & {\int}_{\theta =1}^{2}\parallel {\rho}_{\theta}^{+}{v}_{\theta}^{+}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}+\parallel {\rho}_{\theta}^{}{v}_{\theta}^{}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& \le & {W}_{2}({\rho}_{1}^{+},{\rho}_{2}^{+}){\left({sup}_{\theta}\parallel {\rho}_{\theta}^{+}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}\right)}^{1/2}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& +& {W}_{2}({\rho}_{1}^{},{\rho}_{2}^{}){\left({sup}_{\theta}\parallel {\rho}_{\theta}^{}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}\right)}^{1/2}.\end{array}$$  
Note that the energy estimate is easier here than in the MongeAmpere case, since the problem is immediately uniformly elliptic.
The mappings
${X}_{i}$
satisfy
${X}_{i\#}{\rho}_{0}={\rho}_{i}$
, and
${X}_{i\#}\left({\rho}_{0}^{\pm}\right)={\rho}_{i}^{\pm}.$
Hence,
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{W}_{2}^{2}({\rho}_{1}^{\pm},{\rho}_{2}^{\pm})& \le & \int {\rho}_{0}^{\pm}{X}_{1}{X}_{2}{}^{2}.\end{array}$$  
Using Proposition 5.3 , we conclude:
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \parallel \nabla {\psi}_{1}\nabla {\psi}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{d}\right)}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& \le & 2\parallel {X}_{2}{X}_{1}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}}{\left(\parallel {\rho}^{0}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}max\left\{\parallel {\rho}_{1}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}},\parallel {\rho}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}\right\}\right)}^{1/2}.\end{array}$$  
This ends the proof of Proposition 5.2 . Note that in our specific case,
${X}_{i}$
are Lebesgue measure preserving invertible mappings, therefore
$\parallel {\rho}_{i}^{\pm}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}=\parallel {\rho}_{0}^{\pm}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}$
, and the estimate can be simplified in
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\parallel \nabla {\psi}_{1}\nabla {\psi}_{2}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{d}\right)}\le 2\parallel {\rho}_{0}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}\parallel {X}_{2}{X}_{1}{\parallel}_{{L}^{2}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{d}\right)}.& & \end{array}$$  
$\square $
Remark: This technique can be used to conclude uniqueness for many nonlinear systems, where a transport equation and an elliptic equation are coupled. The velocity field is the gradient of a potential satisfying a elliptic equation whose right hand side depends smoothly on the density.
For example, we have uniqueness of solutions to the VlasovPoisson system and EulerPoisson system with bounded density and bounded velocity. The VlasovMongeAmpere and EulerMongeAmpere systems have also been studied by the author ([
?]
, [
?]
), and the same technique apply to yield uniqueness for solutions with
${C}^{\alpha}$
density and bounded velocity. Note however that to enforce uniform ellipticity, we need for the MongeAmpere equation the density to be bounded by below which is not the case for the Poisson equation.
6 Convergence to the Euler equation
6.1 Scaling of the system
Here we present a rescaled version of the 2d
$SG$
system and some formal arguments to motivate the next convergence results. Here
$x\in {\mathbb{T}}^{2},t\in {\mathbb{R}}^{+}$
and for
$\mathbf{v}=({v}_{1},{v}_{2})\in {\mathbb{R}}^{2}$
,
${\mathbf{v}}^{\perp}$
now means
$({v}_{2},{v}_{1})$
. Introducing
$\psi \left[\rho \right]=\Psi \left[\rho \right]x{}^{2}/2$
, where
$\Psi \left[\rho \right]$
is given by Theorem 1.2 , the periodic 2d
$SG$
system now reads
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\partial}_{t}\rho +\nabla \cdot (\rho \nabla {\psi}^{\perp})=0,\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & det(I+{D}^{2}\psi )=\rho .\end{array}$$  
If
$\rho $
is close to one then
$\psi $
should be small, and therefore one may consider the linearization
$det(I+{D}^{2}\psi )=1+\Delta \psi +O\left(\right{D}^{2}\psi {}^{2})$
, that yields
$\Delta \psi \simeq \rho 1$
.
Thus for small initial data,
i.e.
${\rho}^{0}1$
small, one expects
$\psi ,\mu =\rho 1$
to stay close to a solution of the Euler incompressible equation
$EI$
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\partial}_{t}\overline{\rho}+\nabla \cdot (\overline{\rho}\nabla {\overline{\phi}}^{\perp})=0,\end{array}$$ 
(24)

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \Delta \overline{\phi}=\overline{\rho}.\end{array}$$ 
(25)

We shall rescale the equation, in order to consider quantities of order one.
We introduce the new unknown
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\rho}^{\epsilon}(t,x)=\frac{1}{\epsilon}\left(\rho \right(\frac{t}{\epsilon},x)1),\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\psi}^{\epsilon}(t,x)=\frac{1}{\epsilon}\psi (\frac{t}{\epsilon},x).\end{array}$$  
Then we have
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \rho \left(t\right)=1+\epsilon {\rho}^{\epsilon}\left(\epsilon t\right),\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \Psi \left[\rho \right]\left(t\right)=x{}^{2}/2+\epsilon {\psi}^{\epsilon}(\epsilon t),\end{array}$$  
and we define
${\phi}^{\epsilon}$
by
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\epsilon {\phi}^{\epsilon}=x{}^{2}/2\Phi [\rho ],& & \end{array}$$  
so that
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}=\nabla {\psi}^{\epsilon}(\nabla \Phi [\rho \left]\right).& & \end{array}$$ 
(26)

Hence, at a point
$x\in {\mathbb{T}}^{2}$
,
$\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon \perp}$
is the velocity of the associated dual point
$\nabla \Phi \left[\rho \right]\left(x\right)$
. The evolution of this quantities is then governed by the system
$S{G}_{\epsilon}$
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\partial}_{t}{\rho}^{\epsilon}+\nabla \cdot ({\rho}^{\epsilon}\nabla {\psi}^{\epsilon \perp})=0,\end{array}$$ 
(27)

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & det(I+\epsilon {D}^{2}{\psi}^{\epsilon})=1+\epsilon {\rho}^{\epsilon}.\end{array}$$ 
(28)

Remark: Note that this system admits global weak solutions with initial data any bounded measure
${\rho}^{\epsilon 0}$
, as long as
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{\rho}^{\epsilon 0}=0,\end{array}$$ 
(29)

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\rho}^{\epsilon 0}\ge \frac{1}{\epsilon}.\end{array}$$ 
(30)

Note also that if the pair
$(\overline{\rho},\overline{\phi})$
is solution to the
$EI$
system ( 24 , 25 ), so is the pair
$\left(\frac{1}{\epsilon}\overline{\rho}(\frac{t}{\epsilon},x),\frac{1}{\epsilon}\overline{\phi}(\frac{t}{\epsilon},x)\right)$
.
We now present the convergence results. We show that solutions of
$S{G}_{\epsilon}$
converge to solutions of
$EI$
in the following sense: if
${\rho}^{\epsilon 0}$
, the initial data of
$S{G}_{\epsilon}$
, is close (in some sense depending on the type of convergence we wish to show) to a smooth initial data
${\overline{\rho}}^{0}$
for
$EI$
, then
${\rho}^{\epsilon}$
and
$\overline{\rho}$
remain close for some time. This time goes to
$\infty $
when
$\epsilon $
goes to 0.
We present two different versions of this result: the first one is for weak solutions of
$S{G}_{\epsilon}$
, and the second one is for Lipschitz solutions.
6.2 Convergence of weak solutions
Theorem 6.1.
Let
$({\rho}^{\epsilon},{\psi}^{\epsilon})$
be a weak solution of the
$S{G}_{\epsilon}$
system ( 27 , 28 ). Let
$(\overline{\rho},\overline{\phi})$
be a smooth
${C}^{3}\left(\right[0,T]\times {\mathbb{T}}^{2})$
solution of the
$EI$
system ( 24 , 25 ). Let
${\phi}^{\epsilon}$
be obtained from
${\psi}^{\epsilon}$
as in ( 26 ), let
${H}_{\epsilon}\left(t\right)$
be defined by
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{H}_{\epsilon}\left(t\right)=\frac{1}{2}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{\left\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\nabla \overline{\phi}\right}^{2},& & \end{array}$$  
then
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{H}_{\epsilon}\left(t\right)\le \left({H}_{\epsilon}\right(0)+C{\epsilon}^{2/3}(1+t\left)\right)expCt& & \end{array}$$  
where
$C$
depends on
${sup}_{0\le s\le t}\{\parallel {D}^{3}\overline{\phi}(s),{D}^{2}{\partial}_{t}\overline{\phi}(s\left){\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{2}\right)}\right\}$
.
Remark 1: Note that
$\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon \perp}(t,x)$
is the velocity at point
$\nabla \Phi \left[\rho \right]=x\epsilon \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}$
.
Thus we compare the
$S{G}_{\epsilon}$
velocity at point
$x\epsilon \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}$
(the dual point of
$x$
) with the
$EI$
velocity at point
$x$
. Our result allows also to compare the velocities at the same point, by noticing that
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{G}_{\epsilon}\left(t\right)& =& \frac{1}{2}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\rho {\left\nabla {\psi}^{\epsilon}\nabla \overline{\phi}\right}^{2}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& \frac{1}{2}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{\left\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\nabla \overline{\phi}(x\epsilon \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon})\right}^{2}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& \le & C\left({H}_{\epsilon}\right(t)+{\epsilon}^{2})\end{array}$$  
using the smoothness of
$\overline{\phi}$
, and if
${\mathbf{v}}_{s{g}_{\epsilon}},{\mathbf{v}}_{ei}$
are the respective velocities of the
$S{G}_{\epsilon}$
and
$EI$
systems,
${G}_{\epsilon}={\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{\rho}^{\epsilon}{\mathbf{v}}_{s{g}_{\epsilon}}{\mathbf{v}}_{ei}{}^{2}$
.
Remark 2: The expansion
$det(I+{D}^{2}\psi )=1+\Delta \psi +O\left(\right{D}^{2}\psi {}^{2})$
, used above to justify the convergence relies a priori on the control of
${D}^{2}\psi $
in the sup norm. But in the Theorem 6.1 , the initial data must satisfy
$\nabla {\psi}^{\epsilon}$
close in
${L}^{2}$
norm to a smooth divergence free velocity: this condition means that
${D}^{2}{\psi}^{\epsilon}$
is close in
${H}^{1}$
norm to
${D}^{2}\overline{\phi}$
, which is smooth. This control does not allow to justify the expansion
$det(I+{D}^{2}\psi )=1+\Delta \psi +O\left(\right{D}^{2}\psi {}^{2})$
, but we see that the result remains valid.
Proof of Theorem 6.1 In all the proof, we use
$C$
to denote any quantity that depends only on
$\overline{\phi}$
.
We use the conservation of the energy of the
$S{G}_{\epsilon}$
system, given by
$$\begin{array}{ccc}E\left(t\right)={\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}{}^{2}.& & \end{array}$$  
This fact, although formally easily justified, is actually not so straightforward for weak solutions, and has been proved by F. Otto in an unpublished work.
The argument is explained in [
?]
. Therefore
$E\left(t\right)={E}_{0}$
. The energy of the smooth solution of
$EI$
is given by
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\nabla \overline{\phi}{}^{2}& & \end{array}$$  
and also conserved. For all smooth
$\theta $
, we will use the notation:
$$\begin{array}{ccc}<{D}^{2}\theta >(t,x)={\int}_{s=0}^{1}(1s){D}^{2}\theta (t,xs\epsilon \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}(t,x\left)\right).& & \end{array}$$  
Thus we have the identity
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{\rho}^{\epsilon}\theta & =& {\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\theta (x\epsilon \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon})\end{array}$$ 
(31)

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& {\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\theta \epsilon {\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\nabla \theta \cdot \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}+{\epsilon}^{2}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}<{D}^{2}\theta >\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}.\end{array}$$ 
(32)

Using the energy bound, the last term is bounded by
${\epsilon}^{2}\parallel {D}^{2}\theta {\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{2}\right)}{E}_{0}$
. Then we write
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{d}{dt}{H}_{\epsilon}\left(t\right)& =& \frac{d}{dt}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\nabla \overline{\phi}\cdot \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}.\end{array}$$  
Using the identity ( 32 ), we have for all smooth
$\theta $
,
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\epsilon {\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\nabla \theta \cdot \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}={\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{\rho}^{\epsilon}\theta +{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\theta +{\epsilon}^{2}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}<{D}^{2}\theta >\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon},& & \end{array}$$  
hence, replacing
$\theta $
by
$\overline{\phi}$
in this identity, we get
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{d}{dt}{H}_{\epsilon}\left(t\right)& =& \frac{1}{\epsilon}\frac{d}{dt}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}[{\rho}^{\epsilon}\overline{\phi}\overline{\phi}{\epsilon}^{2}<{D}^{2}\overline{\phi}>\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}].\end{array}$$  
We can suppose without loss of generality that
${\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\overline{\phi}(t,x)dx\equiv 0$
. Then if we define
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{Q}_{\epsilon}\left(t\right)={\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\epsilon <{D}^{2}\overline{\phi}>\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon},& & \end{array}$$  
(note that
$\left{Q}_{\epsilon}\right(t\left)\right\le C\epsilon $
), we have
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{d}{dt}({H}_{\epsilon}+{Q}_{\epsilon})=\frac{1}{\epsilon}\frac{d}{dt}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{\rho}^{\epsilon}\overline{\phi}.& & \end{array}$$  
Hence we are left to compute
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{1}{\epsilon}\frac{d}{dt}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{\rho}^{\epsilon}\overline{\phi}& =& \frac{1}{\epsilon}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{\partial}_{t}{\rho}^{\epsilon}\overline{\phi}+{\rho}^{\epsilon}{\partial}_{t}\overline{\phi}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& \frac{1}{\epsilon}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{\rho}^{\epsilon}\nabla {\psi}^{\epsilon \perp}\cdot \nabla \overline{\phi}\epsilon \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\cdot \nabla {\partial}_{t}\overline{\phi}+{\epsilon}^{2}<{D}^{2}{\partial}_{t}\overline{\phi}>\nabla \overline{\phi}\nabla \overline{\phi}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& \frac{1}{\epsilon}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{\rho}^{\epsilon}\nabla {\psi}^{\epsilon \perp}\cdot \nabla \overline{\phi}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\cdot \nabla {\partial}_{t}\overline{\phi}+O\left(\epsilon \right)\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& {T}_{1}+{T}_{2}+O\left(\epsilon \right),\end{array}$$  
where at the second line we have used ( 27 ) for the first term and ( 32 ) with
$\theta ={\partial}_{t}\overline{\phi}$
for the second and third term. (Remember also that we assume
$\int {\partial}_{t}\overline{\phi}\equiv 0$
.) We will now use the other formulation of the Euler equation:
$\mathbf{v}=\nabla {\overline{\phi}}^{\perp}$
satisfies
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\partial}_{t}\mathbf{v}+\mathbf{v}\cdot \nabla \mathbf{v}=\nabla p.& & \end{array}$$  
After a rotation of
$\pi /2$
, this equation becomes:
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\partial}_{t}\nabla \overline{\phi}+{D}^{2}\overline{\phi}\nabla {\overline{\phi}}^{\perp}=\nabla {p}^{\perp},& & \end{array}$$  
thus for
${T}_{2}$
we have
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{T}_{2}& =& {\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\cdot \nabla {\partial}_{t}\overline{\phi}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& {\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}{D}^{2}\overline{\phi}\nabla {\overline{\phi}}^{\perp}.\end{array}$$  
For
${T}_{1}$
, using ( 26 ) and ( 32 ), we have
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\epsilon {T}_{1}& =& {\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}{\rho}^{\epsilon}\nabla {\psi}^{\epsilon \perp}\cdot \nabla \overline{\phi}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& {\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\nabla {\psi}^{\epsilon \perp}(x\epsilon \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon})\cdot \nabla \overline{\phi}(x\epsilon \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon})\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& {\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon \perp}\cdot \nabla \overline{\phi}\epsilon \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon \perp}{D}^{2}\overline{\phi}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}+\epsilon \Delta \end{array}$$  
where
$\Delta $
is defined by
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\Delta ={\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon \perp}\left({D}^{2}\overline{\phi}{\int}_{s=0}^{1}{D}^{2}\overline{\phi}(xs\epsilon \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon})ds\right)\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}.& & \end{array}$$ 
(33)

The term
${\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon \perp}\cdot \nabla \overline{\phi}$
vanishes identically. Concerning
$\Delta $
, we claim the following estimate:
Lemma 6.2.
Let
$\Delta $
be defined by ( 33 ), then
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\Delta \le C({\epsilon}^{\frac{2}{3}}+{H}_{\epsilon}),& & \end{array}$$  
where
$C$
depends on
$\parallel {D}^{3}\overline{\phi}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}$
.
We postpone the proof of this lemma after the proof of Theorem 6.1 . We now obtain
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{d}{dt}\left({H}_{\epsilon}\right(t)+{Q}_{\epsilon}(t\left)\right)& \le & {\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}(\nabla {\overline{\phi}}^{\perp}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon \perp}){D}^{2}\overline{\phi}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}+C{H}_{\epsilon}+C{\epsilon}^{2/3}.\end{array}$$  
Noticing that for every
$\theta :{\mathbb{T}}^{2}\mapsto \mathbb{R}$
we have
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\nabla {\theta}^{\perp}{D}^{2}\overline{\phi}\nabla \overline{\phi}={\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}\nabla {\theta}^{\perp}\cdot \nabla \left(\frac{1}{2}\right\nabla \overline{\phi}{}^{2})=0,& & \end{array}$$  
we find that
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}(\nabla {\overline{\phi}}^{\perp}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon \perp}){D}^{2}\overline{\phi}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}={\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}(\nabla {\phi}^{\perp}\nabla {\overline{\phi}}^{\epsilon \perp}){D}^{2}\overline{\phi}(\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\nabla \overline{\phi}),& & \end{array}$$  
hence
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{d}{dt}\left({H}_{\epsilon}\right(t)+{Q}_{\epsilon}(t\left)\right)& \le & {\int}_{{\mathbb{T}}^{2}}(\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon \perp}\nabla {\overline{\phi}}^{\perp}){D}^{2}\overline{\phi}(\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\nabla \overline{\phi})+C{H}_{\epsilon}+C{\epsilon}^{2/3}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& \le & C\left({H}_{\epsilon}\right(t)+{Q}_{\epsilon}(t)+{\epsilon}^{2/3})\end{array}$$  
using that
${Q}_{\epsilon}\left(t\right)\le C\epsilon $
. Therefore
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{H}_{\epsilon}\left(t\right)+{Q}_{\epsilon}\left(t\right)\le \left({H}_{\epsilon}\right(0)+{Q}_{\epsilon}(0)+C{\epsilon}^{2/3}t)exp\left(Ct\right)& & \end{array}$$  
and finally
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{H}_{\epsilon}\left(t\right)\le \left({H}_{\epsilon}\right(0)+C{\epsilon}^{2/3}(1+t\left)\right)exp\left(Ct\right)& & \end{array}$$  
and the result follows. Check that the constant
$C$
depends only on
${sup}_{0\le s\le t}\{\parallel {D}^{3}\overline{\phi},{D}^{2}{\partial}_{t}\overline{\phi}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{2}\right)}\}$
. This ends the proof of Theorem 6.1
$\square $
Proof of Lemma 6.2 First we show that if
$\Theta \left(R\right)={\int}_{\left\{\right\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\ge R\}}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}{}^{2}$
, then
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\Theta \left(R\right)\le C\int \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\nabla \overline{\phi}{}^{2}+\frac{C}{{R}^{2}}.& & \end{array}$$ 
(34)

Indeed,
$\int \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}{}^{2}\le C$
, implies that
$\text{meas}\left\{\right\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\ge R\}\le C\frac{1}{{R}^{2}}.$
Since
$\nabla \overline{\phi}(t,x\left)\right\le C$
for
$(t,x)\in [0,{T}^{\prime}]\times {\mathbb{T}}^{d}$
, we have
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\Theta \left(R\right)& \le & {\int}_{\left\{\right\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\ge R\}}\nabla \overline{\phi}{}^{2}+{\int}_{\left\{\right\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\ge R\}}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\nabla \overline{\phi}{}^{2}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& \le & \frac{C}{{R}^{2}}+\int \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\nabla \overline{\phi}{}^{2}.\end{array}$$  
Hence ( 34 ) is proved.
Then, letting
$$\begin{array}{ccc}K\left(x\right)={D}^{2}\overline{\phi}{\int}_{s=0}^{1}{D}^{2}\overline{\phi}(xs\epsilon \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon})ds,& & \end{array}$$  
we have
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \Delta \le C\Theta \left(R\right)+{\int}_{\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\le R}\leftK\right(x\left)\right\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}{}^{2}\end{array}$$  
with
$\leftK\right(x\left)\right\le C\epsilon \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}$
thus
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \Delta \le C\epsilon {\int}_{\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\le R}\nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}{}^{3}+C\Theta (R)\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \le C\left(\epsilon R\int \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}{}^{2}+\frac{1}{{R}^{2}}+\int \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\nabla \overline{\phi}{}^{2}\right)\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \le C\left(\epsilon R+\frac{1}{{R}^{2}}+\int \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\nabla \overline{\phi}{}^{2}\right)\end{array}$$  
for all R, so for
$R={\epsilon}^{1/3}$
we obtain:
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \Delta \le C{\epsilon}^{2/3}+C\int \nabla {\phi}^{\epsilon}\nabla \overline{\phi}{}^{2}.\end{array}$$  
This proves Lemma 6.2
$\square $
6.3 Convergence of strong solutions
We present here another proof of convergence, that holds for stronger norms. Let us consider as above the solution
$(\overline{\rho},\overline{\phi})$
to Euler:
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\partial}_{t}\overline{\rho}+\nabla \cdot (\overline{\rho}\nabla {\overline{\phi}}^{\perp})=0,\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \Delta \overline{\phi}=\overline{\rho},\end{array}$$  
and we recall the
$S{G}_{\epsilon}$
system
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\partial}_{t}{\rho}^{\epsilon}+\nabla \cdot ({\rho}^{\epsilon}\nabla {\psi}^{\epsilon \perp})=0,\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & det(I+\epsilon {D}^{2}{\psi}^{\epsilon})=1+\epsilon {\rho}^{\epsilon}.\end{array}$$  
We have then
Theorem 6.3.
Let
$(\overline{\rho},\overline{\phi})$
be a solution of
$EI$
, such that that
$\overline{\rho}\in {C}_{loc}^{2}({\mathbb{R}}^{+}\times {\mathbb{T}}^{2})$
. Let
${\rho}^{\epsilon 0}$
be a sequence of initial data for
$S{G}_{\epsilon}$
satisfying ( 29 , 30 ), and such that
$\frac{{\rho}^{\epsilon 0}{\overline{\rho}}^{0}}{\epsilon}$
is bounded in
${W}^{1,\infty}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{2}\right)$
. Then there exists a sequence
$({\rho}^{\epsilon},{\psi}^{\epsilon})$
of solutions to
$S{G}_{\epsilon}$
that satisfies:
for all
$T>0$
, there exists
${\epsilon}_{T}>0$
, such that the sequence
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{{\rho}^{\epsilon}\overline{\rho}}{\epsilon},\frac{\nabla {\psi}^{\epsilon}\nabla \overline{\phi}}{\epsilon}& & \end{array}$$  
for
$0<\epsilon <{\epsilon}_{T}$
is uniformly bounded in
${L}^{\infty}\left(\right[0,T],{W}^{1,\infty}({\mathbb{T}}^{2}\left)\right)$
.
Remark: In the previous theorem, we obtained estimates in
${L}^{2}$
norm, here we obtain estimates in Lipschitz norm. Estimates of higher derivatives follow in the same way.
Proof of Theorem 6.3 We expand the solution of
$S{G}_{\epsilon}$
as the solution of
$EI$
plus a small perturbation of order
$\epsilon $
and show that this perturbation remains bounded in large norms (at least Lipschitz). We first remark the the assumption on
$\overline{\rho}$
implies that
$\forall T>0$
,
$\overline{\phi}\in {L}^{\infty}\left(\right[0,T];{C}^{3}({\mathbb{T}}^{2}\left)\right)$
. Let us write
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\rho}^{\epsilon}=\overline{\rho}+\epsilon {\rho}_{1}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\psi}^{\epsilon}=\overline{\phi}+\epsilon {\psi}_{1}.\end{array}$$  
Rewritten in terms of
${\rho}_{1},{\psi}_{1}$
, the
$S{G}_{\epsilon}$
system reads:
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\partial}_{t}{\rho}_{1}+(\nabla \overline{\phi}+\epsilon \nabla {\psi}_{1}{)}^{\perp}\cdot \nabla {\rho}_{1}=\nabla {\psi}_{1}^{\perp}\cdot \nabla \overline{\rho},\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \Delta {\psi}_{1}+\epsilon \text{trace}\left[{D}^{2}{\psi}_{1}{D}^{2}\overline{\phi}\right]+{\epsilon}^{2}det{D}^{2}{\psi}_{1}={\rho}_{1}det{D}^{2}\overline{\phi}.\end{array}$$  
Differentiating the first equation with respect to space, we find the evolution equation for
$\nabla {\rho}_{1}$
:
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & {\partial}_{t}\nabla {\rho}_{1}+\left(\right(\nabla \overline{\phi}+\epsilon \nabla {\psi}_{1}{)}^{\perp}\cdot \nabla )\nabla {\rho}_{1}\end{array}$$  
$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& ({D}^{2}\overline{\phi}+\epsilon {D}^{2}{\psi}_{1})\nabla {\rho}_{1}^{\perp}{D}^{2}{\psi}_{1}\nabla {\overline{\rho}}^{\perp}{D}^{2}\overline{\rho}\nabla {\psi}_{1}^{\perp}.\end{array}$$ 
(35)

We claim that in order to conclude the proof it is enough to have an estimate of the form
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\parallel {\psi}_{1}(t,\cdot ){\parallel}_{{C}^{1,1}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{2}\right)}\le C(1+\parallel {\rho}_{1}(t,\cdot \left){\parallel}_{{C}^{0,1}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{2}\right)}\right),& & \end{array}$$ 
(36)

where
$C$
depends on
$\overline{\phi}$
. Let us admit this bound temporarily, and finish the proof of the theorem: using ( 36 ) and ( 35 ), we obtain
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{d}{dt}\parallel \nabla {\rho}_{1}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}\le C\left(t\right)(1+\parallel \nabla {\rho}_{1}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}+\epsilon \parallel \nabla {\rho}_{1}{\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}}^{2}),& & \end{array}$$  
where the constant
$C\left(t\right)$
depends on the
${C}^{2}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{2}\right)$
norm of
$\left(\overline{\rho}\right(t,\cdot ),\overline{\phi}(t,\cdot \left)\right)$
. This quantity is bounded on every interval
$[0,T]$
.
Thus we conclude using Gronwall’s lemma that
$\parallel \nabla {\rho}_{1}(t,\cdot ){\parallel}_{{L}^{\infty}\left({\mathbb{T}}^{2}\right)}$
remains bounded on
$[0,{T}_{\epsilon}]$
with
${T}_{\epsilon}$
going to
$T$
as
$\epsilon $
goes to 0. We then choose
$T$
as large as we want, since when
$d=2$
the smooth solution to
$EI$
is global in time. From estimate ( 36 ) the
${W}^{1,\infty}$
bound on
${\rho}_{1}$
implies a
${W}^{2,\infty}$
bound on
${\psi}_{1}$
. Then, we remember that
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{\rho}_{1}=\frac{{\rho}^{\epsilon}\overline{\rho}}{\epsilon},\nabla {\psi}_{1}=\frac{\nabla {\psi}^{\epsilon}\nabla \overline{\phi}}{\epsilon}& & \end{array}$$  
to conclude the proof of Theorem 6.3 .
$\square $
Proof of the estimate ( 36 ) We write the equation followed by
${\psi}_{1}$
as follows:
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\Delta {\psi}_{1}=\text{trace}\left[\epsilon {D}^{2}{\psi}_{1}{D}^{2}\overline{\phi}\right]{\epsilon}^{2}det{D}^{2}{\psi}_{1}+{\rho}_{1}det{D}^{2}\overline{\phi}.& & \end{array}$$  
We recall that
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\parallel fg{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}}\le \parallel f{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}}\parallel g{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}},& & \end{array}$$  
hence, using Schauder
${C}^{2,\alpha}$
estimates for solutions to Laplace equation (see [
?]
), we have
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\parallel {\psi}_{1}{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}}\le {C}_{1}(1+\epsilon \parallel {\psi}_{1}{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}}+{\epsilon}^{2}\parallel {\psi}_{1}{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}}^{2}),& & \end{array}$$ 
(37)

where
${C}_{1}$
depends on
$\parallel \overline{\phi}{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}},\parallel {\rho}_{1}{\parallel}_{{C}^{\alpha}}$
. The inequality ( 37 ) will be satisfied in two cases: either for
$\parallel {\psi}_{1}{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}}\le {C}_{2}$
or for
$\parallel {\psi}_{1}{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}}\ge {C}_{3}{\epsilon}^{2}$
where
${C}_{2},{C}_{3}$
are positive constants that depend on
${C}_{1}$
.
Now we show that
${\psi}^{\epsilon}$
, solution of ( 28 ), is bounded in
${C}^{2,\alpha}$
for
${\rho}^{\epsilon}$
bounded in
${C}^{\alpha}$
norm. We consider for
$t\in [0,1]$
${\psi}_{t}^{\epsilon}$
the unique up to a constant periodic solution of
$$\begin{array}{ccc}det(I+\epsilon {D}^{2}{\psi}_{t}^{\epsilon})=1+t\epsilon {\rho}^{\epsilon}.& & \end{array}$$  
Diiferentiating this equation with respect to
$t$
, we find
$$\begin{array}{ccc}{M}_{ij}{D}_{ij}{\partial}_{t}{\psi}_{t}^{\epsilon}={\rho}^{\epsilon},& & \end{array}$$  
where
$M$
is the comatrix of
$I+\epsilon {D}^{2}{\psi}_{t}^{\epsilon}$
. From the regularity result of Theorem 4.3 ,
$M$
is
${C}^{\alpha}$
and striclty elliptic. From Schauder estimates, we have then
$\parallel {\partial}_{t}{\psi}_{t}^{\epsilon}{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}}\le C\parallel {\rho}^{\epsilon}{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}}$
, and integrated over
$t\in [0,1]$
, we get
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\parallel {\psi}^{\epsilon}{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}}\le C\parallel {\rho}^{\epsilon}{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}}.& & \end{array}$$  
Hence, since
${\psi}^{\epsilon}=\overline{\phi}+\epsilon {\psi}_{1}$
, we have
${\psi}_{1}$
bounded by
$C/\epsilon $
in
${C}^{2,\alpha}$
. Hence it can not be bigger than
${C}_{3}/{\epsilon}^{2}$
, and to satsify ( 37 ), we must have
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\parallel {\psi}_{1}{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}}\le {C}_{2},& & \end{array}$$  
where
${C}_{2}$
as above depends on
$\parallel \overline{\phi}{\parallel}_{{C}^{2,\alpha}},\parallel {\rho}_{1}{\parallel}_{{C}^{\alpha}}$
. This proves estimate ( 36 ).
$\square $
Acknowledgment: The author thanks Mike Cullen for his remarks, and also Yann Brenier, since part of this work was done under his direction, during the author’s PhD thesis. He also thanks Robert McCann and the Fields Institute of Toronto for their hospitality.
G. Loeper EPFL, SB, IMA 10015 Lausanne email: gregoire.loeper@epfl.ch