I am reading Evans' book Partial differential equations. but I am really curious about how he define the appropriate energy? Is there any principle or rule to do this things? Because I notice that although the energies he defined in this book are always contain kinetic energy and potential energy, they are always contain other terms. I mean the details are really different. For example, in Chapter 12 of his book on nonlinear wave equations. He defined the energy of equation $$ u_{tt}-\Delta u+f(u)=0 $$ as $$ E(t):=\int_{R^n}\frac{1}{2} (u_t^2+|Du|^2)+F(u) dx $$ where $$ F(z):=\int_{0}^{z}f(w)dw $$
However, He also define the energy of equation $$ u_{tt}-\Delta u+f(Du,u_t,u)=0 $$ as $$ E(t):=\frac{1}{2}\int_{R^n} u_t^2+|Du|^2+u^2 dx $$
I wonder why he didn't define the same energy (might not get the what we want?), or I should say why he defined the second energy just like the first one or vice versa.
Hoping your answers. Many thanks.
Physical interpretation can be very helpful, but ultimately we need $E$ to be such that we can
The consideration usually begins with 1. Note that $u_tu_{tt} = \frac{1}{2}(u_t)^2$. So, if we have a hyperbolic PDE $u_{tt}=F(x,u,Du,D^2u)$, it is reasonable to multiply both sides by $u_t$ and try to see if a part of the right hand-side can also be turned into the $t$-derivative of something, possibly after integration by parts in the $x$ variable. This works for the Laplacian: $$ \int u_t \Delta u = - \int D_x(u_t)\, D_xu = \frac{d}{dt} \int \frac12 |Du|^2 $$ Also works for anything of the form $f(u)$, because $u_t f(u)= \frac{\partial }{\partial t} F(u)$ by the chain rule, if $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$.
However, the term $f(Du,u_t,u)$ is not so simple. A superficial reason is that there is no "antiderivative" $F$, as $f$ is a function of three variables. More substantial reason (again from physics) is that $f$ is a force that depends on derivatives $Du$ and $u_t$, and such a force is not conservative — it does not have an energy potential.
Evans includes $u^2$ in the short-time existence proof for the nonlinear wave equation (Theorem 3 in Chapter 12) not because it makes for a neat identity/inequality for $dE/dt$ (there isn't one) but because $\int u^2$ also needs to be estimated to prove the theorem (see item 2 above).