Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 46 references

Mixing for generic passive scalars by incompressible flows

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A single bounded scalar whose orbit never settles forces generic mixing and non-precompact flow maps.

desk verdict Genuinely new non-robustness result and a mostly sound Young-measure/σ-algebra chain, but Section 5's metric claim is false as stated; the L^1-equivalence needs a repair rather than a rethink. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.06706 v1 pith:5DCEHZC2 submitted 2025-06-07 math.AP

Zeyu Jin , Ruo Li This is my paper
classification math.AP MSC 76F2535Q3528D0537A25
keywords mixingpassivescalarsincompressibleflowsgenericityYoungmeasurestransportequationnon-precompactnessunmixedsigma-algebra
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper asks whether mixing by an incompressible flow is typical rather than exceptional, and answers the data-side version of that question. For a fixed divergence-free velocity field, if even one bounded initial scalar has a transport orbit that never settles down in $L^2$, then the collection of such mixed initial data is open and dense in $L^\infty$. The same condition is shown to be equivalent to the family of measure-preserving flow maps failing to be precompact in convergence in measure. Before reaching this conclusion, the paper proves that standard mixing criteria, such as topological mixing or decay of mixing scales, can all be destroyed by arbitrarily small perturbations of the velocity field, so a genuinely stable theory has to work with this weaker notion of mixing.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the unmixed $\sigma$-algebra $\mathcal{N}_u$, the family of measurable sets $D$ whose indicator functions $\mathbf{1}_D$ have $L^2$-precompact transport orbits. A Young-measure limit theorem adapted to $L^\infty$ data, extending the classical fundamental theorem of Young measures to measure-preserving bijections, shows that $D$ belongs to $\mathcal{N}_u$ exactly when every Young measure generated by the flow gives $D$ mass $0$ or $1$. From this, a bounded density $\rho$ fails to mix if and only if $\rho$ is $\mathcal{N}_u$-measurable, and the paper then proves that this same $\sigma$-algebra controls both generic mixing, via openness and denseness of $\mathcal{F}_u$ in $L^\infty$, and precompactness of the flow maps in the $L^1$ topology.

What would settle it

Take a divergence-free time-dependent velocity field in $L^\infty([0,\infty);W^{1,p})$ whose flow maps converge in measure to a fixed measure-preserving bijection. If the theorem is right, every bounded initial datum then has a precompact $L^2$ orbit; a single bounded datum whose transport orbit has two distinct subsequential limits in $L^2$ would refute the claimed equivalence.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes a three-way equivalence: for a divergence-free velocity field $u$, if there exists one bounded initial density $\rho_0$ whose transported orbit $\{\rho_0\circ\Phi_t^{-1}\}_{t\ge 0}$ is not precompact in $L^2$, then the set of such mixed data is open and dense in $L^\infty$, and this happens exactly when the measure-preserving flow maps $\{\Phi_t\}_{t\ge 0}$ are not precompact in the $L^1$ (convergence-in-measure) topology. The characterization passes through the unmixed $\sigma$-algebra $\mathcal{N}_u$: a bounded density fails to mix precisely when it is measurable with respect to $\mathcal{N}_u$, equivalently when each of its level-set indicators has a precompact orbit. The paper also proves that classical mixing criteria fail to persist under arbitrarily small perturbations of the velocity field in $L^\infty([0,\infty);W^{1,p})$, which motivates seeking this weaker and stable notion of generic mixing.

Load-bearing premise

The argument defines a density as mixed when its past states never settle into a precompact family, not when it homogenizes to its spatial average; if one insisted on genuine homogenization, the paper's equivalence result would not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any divergence-free field in $L^\infty([0,\infty);W^{1,p})$, classical mixing criteria such as topological mixing and universal non-precompactness can be destroyed by an arbitrarily small perturbation, so any stable theory must use the weaker non-precompactness notion.
  • If one bounded initial density is mixed by $u$, then the set $\mathcal{F}_u$ of mixed initial data is open and dense in $L^\infty(\mathbb{T}^d)$; mixing is therefore a generic property of initial data whenever it happens at all.
  • A density fails to mix exactly when each of its level sets is unmixed, equivalently when the density is measurable with respect to the unmixed $\sigma$-algebra $\mathcal{N}_u$.
  • The family of flow maps $\{\Phi_t\}_{t\ge 0}$ is precompact in convergence in measure, hence in $L^p$ for every $1\le p<\infty$, exactly when every nontrivial bounded datum is unmixed; generic mixing is equivalent to non-precompactness of the flow maps.
  • The framework opens the way to a conjecture about velocity fields themselves: in a topologically generic sense, divergence-free fields should have flow maps that are not precompact in $L^1$.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the characterization is right, a single mixed scalar becomes a testable witness for generic mixing: checking one bounded initial datum, or numerically testing whether the flow maps have at least two distinct subsequential limits in measure, certifies that open-and-dense many bounded data mix.
  • The unmixed $\sigma$-algebra gives a sharp obstruction: any velocity field whose flow maps are precompact in measure leaves every bounded scalar trapped, and this can be diagnosed by whether some level-set indicator fails to converge strongly in $L^2$.
  • The same $\sigma$-algebra picture may transfer to vorticity advection in two-dimensional incompressible fluids, where the corresponding claim is a standing conjecture that generic bounded vorticities have non-precompact $L^2$ orbits.
  • A natural extension is to ask whether the open-and-dense conclusion can be upgraded to a measure-theoretic genericity statement, connecting the non-precompactness criterion to probability-one assertions about random incompressible velocity fields.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies genericity of mixing for passive scalars transported by divergence-free, non-autonomous incompressible flows on the torus, with velocity fields in L∞([0,∞);W^{1,p}) and initial data in L∞. It first proves (Theorem 1) that classical mixing criteria—topological mixing, geometric/functional mixing, and universal non-precompactness of all nontrivial L2 orbits—are not robust under arbitrarily small L∞(W^{1,p}) perturbations of the velocity field. It then develops a Young-measure theory for measure-preserving flow maps adapted to L∞ data (Theorem 3), characterizes the initial data whose orbits are not precompact in L2 (Definition 1, Section 2.2) in terms of the "unmixed σ-algebra" Nu (Theorem 4), and derives that if one bounded datum has a non-precompact orbit, then the set of such data is open and dense in L∞ (Corollary 1 and Remark 6). Section 5 aims to tie this property to non-precompactness of the flow maps in L1/Lp by introducing a metric d on measure-preserving bijections and proving an equivalence with convergence in measure (Proposition 1). The paper concludes with a conjecture on the genericity of velocity fields that mix generic data. The notion of "mixing" used throughout is the paper's own: an initial datum is mixed if its orbit in L2 is not precompact, which is strictly weaker than classical homogenization; this is stated clearly in Definition 1.

Significance. If the main results survive revision, the paper offers a new and coherent framework for generic weak mixing in non-autonomous incompressible flows, with a self-contained Young-measure characterization of the set of mixed initial data. The one-datum/generic-data equivalence (Corollary 1 and Remark 6) is elegant and appears to be correct, and the connection to measure-preserving flow maps is a worthwhile target even though the current proof is flawed. The paper relies on standard tools (DiPerna–Lions theory, Ball's Young measures, Bogovskii operators, measure-algebra realizability) and contains no fitted parameters; it also honestly identifies the nonstandard nature of its mixing notion. The significance is tempered by two issues: (i) the advertised equivalence with flow-map precompactness in Lp is currently broken by a false metric equivalence in Section 5, and (ii) the term "mixing" means non-precompactness rather than homogenization, so the results do not apply to the classical functional/geometric mixing scales without further work. These are repairable, but they are load-bearing for the abstract's central claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.1–5.2, Eq. (17) and Proposition 1] The assertion after (17) that convergence in the metric d(Φ,Ψ)=sup_D μ(Φ(D)△Ψ(D)) is equivalent to pointwise convergence μ(Φ_j(D)△Φ(D))→0 for every D is false. Pointwise convergence for each fixed D does not control the supremum over D. For instance, on T^1, the rotations R_h by h → 0 satisfy μ(R_h(D)△D)→0 for every fixed D, yet sup_D μ(R_h(D)△D) does not go to 0; using Rokhlin-tower sets one can make the symmetric difference arbitrarily close to 1. The proof of Proposition 1 actually establishes only the equivalence of convergence in measure with pointwise convergence for each D; the second half of the proof, which approximates a fixed D by balls, cannot produce the uniform-in-D control required for d-convergence. This is not a local presentation issue: Theorem 5 and its proof use d-convergence in a way that is invalid, and the claimed equivalence with non-precompactness in Lp is accordingly unproven as written.
  2. [§5.1, Theorem 5] Theorem 5 is false as stated with the metric d. Take d=1 and the constant-in-space velocity u(t,x)=-t^{-2} on T^1, so that Φ_t is the rotation by 1/t. Since translations act strongly continuously on L2(T^1), every indicator orbit {1_D∘Φ_t^{-1}} is precompact, hence Nu=M. However, {Φ_t} is not precompact in d: for distinct t,s, d(Φ_t,Φ_s)=sup_D μ(D△R_{1/t-1/s}(D)), which for nonzero α=1/t-1/s is positive and in fact close to 1 for large t,s (equal to 1 for irrational α, and at least (q-1)/q for rational α=p/q with q large). Thus Nu=M but no subsequence converges in d. The theorem should be restated using convergence in measure (equivalently Lp for 1≤p<∞). The intended equivalence with Nu=M can likely be repaired: the proof of Proposition 1's first half shows that pointwise convergence for each D implies convergence in measure, and the measure-algebra realization argument in the proof can be combined with this to obtain a subsequence converging in measure rather than in d.
  3. [§3.2, around Eq. (11)] The proof of Theorem 3 contains a reversed inequality in the displayed computation preceding (11). With 0≤ρ≤1_D, the weak limit satisfies ∫∫ρ(y)dν_x(y)dx ≤ ∫ν_x(D)dx, not ≥. The subsequent claim that taking an infimum over such ρ yields ∫ν_x(D)dx ≤ μ(D) is also wrong; one should take a supremum over continuous ρ approximating 1_D from below (or, directly, use the measure-preserving property to obtain the equality ∫ν_x(D)dx=μ(D)). The intended inequality (11) is true, but the proof as written is invalid, and the estimate for the third term in (13) relies on (11). The statement of Theorem 3 is likely correct, but the proof needs to be rewritten.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Remark 3] The statement that "the composition of a merely measurable function ρ with a measurable map Ψ_j need not be measurable" is imprecise: it is true for arbitrary Lebesgue-measurable maps, but for measure-preserving maps Ψ the composition ρ∘Ψ is Lebesgue measurable. The remark should be rephrased to avoid claiming failure for the measure-preserving case, which is exactly the case used in the paper.
  2. [§5.1, after Eq. (17)] The word "Equivalently" before (17) should be removed. Pointwise convergence for every D is strictly weaker than convergence in the metric d; the two notions coincide only in the false direction claimed. The paper should keep (17) as a separate definition or state it as the pointwise topology on M.
  3. [Theorem 5 proof] In the converse direction of Theorem 5, the sentence "For each D∈M, the sequence 1_D∘Φ_tj^{-1} converges strongly in L2, since 1_D∉Fu" is not justified by precompactness alone. Precompactness gives a convergent subsequence, not convergence of the given sequence; the Young-measure argument in Lemma 1 should be invoked after passing to a suitable subsequence. This is part of the repair needed for the theorem.
  4. [§6, Conclusions] The closing sentence, "which in turn is equivalent to the non-precompactness of the measure-preserving flow maps in the L1 topology," is not established by the current proof. It becomes plausible after replacing the metric d by convergence in measure; the statement should be corrected and then accompanied by a proof of the repaired Theorem 5.
  5. [Abstract and Introduction] The term "mixing" in Definition 1 means non-precompactness in L2, not homogenization. The abstract and introduction state this distinction, but readers could still interpret the main theorems as statements about classical mixing (weak convergence of ρ(t) to its mean). A prominent remark that the results concern the weaker non-precompactness notion would strengthen the paper's clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: all load-bearing results are derived from stated definitions and external standard theorems, with no fitted parameters and no self-citations.

full rationale

The paper's central equations are derived self-containedly. Definition 1 stipulates that 'mixed' means the L2 orbit {rho(t)} is not precompact; this is an explicit weakening and is not disguised as classical mixing. The equivalence 'one mixed datum iff generic data mix' follows from Theorem 4 (sigma-algebra characterization) and Corollary 1, not from the definition alone: existence of one mixed datum gives Nu != M, and Nu != M gives openness and denseness of Fu via the closure of Nu-measurable functions and perturbation by an indicator of a set outside Nu. No parameter is fitted and no benchmark is used as an input. The flow-map equivalence in Theorem 5 is again a derived statement using Young measures and Kechris' measure-algebra isomorphism theorem; it is not an input. There are no self-citations (the reference list contains no works by the authors), no imported uniqueness theorem, and no ansatz smuggled in via citation. The reviewer-reported concern about Proposition 1 (that the sup-metric d may not induce the same convergence as convergence in measure) concerns the correctness of a proof step, not circularity: even if Theorem 5's metric equivalence is false as written, the claim would be unproven rather than reduced to its own assumptions. Accordingly no circular step is exhibited and the score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central results rest on standard PDE and measure-theory tools; there are no fitted parameters or ad hoc constants. The only object constructed by the paper is the unmixed sigma-algebra Nu, which is defined from the problem data rather than postulated, so it is not listed as an invented entity. The main definitional commitment is the weakened meaning of 'mixing' (non-precompactness), which is a modeling choice listed among the axioms above.

assumptions (7)
  • standard math DiPerna-Lions well-posedness for u in L-infinity(W^{1,p}), p in (1,infinity): unique weak solutions and regular Lagrangian flow maps Phi_t preserving Lebesgue measure
    Section 2.1; the entire framework of flow maps and transported scalars rests on this theorem.
  • standard math Ball's fundamental theorem of Young measures (Theorem 2 of the paper)
    Section 3.1; the basis of the Young-measure machinery used throughout Sections 3 and 4.
  • standard math Bogovskii operator on the annulus B_{2delta}\B_delta with scale-uniform estimate ||w_t||_{W^{1,p}} <= C ||f_t||_{Lp}
    Section 2.3, eqs. (6)-(9); used to build divergence-free localized perturbations. Uniformity in delta is asserted but not proved; it follows from dilation invariance of the annulus.
  • standard math Kechris Theorem 15.10: every automorphism of the measure algebra (M/J, mu) is realized by a measure-preserving bijection
    Section 5.1, proof of Theorem 5; converts sigma-isomorphism limits back into flow-map limits.
  • domain assumption Uniform integrability of {|nabla u(t,·)|^p}_{t>=0} in Theorem 1
    Section 2.3, hypothesis of Theorem 1; the authors note it holds automatically for time-independent W^{1,p} fields and for u in L-infinity(W^{1,p+epsilon}); it is used to make perturbation sizes uniform in t.
  • domain assumption Genericity interpreted as Baire category in the space of divergence-free velocity fields
    Section 2.1 and Conjecture 1; the paper explicitly chooses topological genericity over measure-theoretic genericity.
  • standard math Lusin's theorem and Tietze extension used to approximate L-infinity data by continuous data on large compact sets
    Section 3.2, proof of Theorem 3; needed for the extension of Young measures from C(T^d) to L-infinity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Mixing for generic passive scalars by incompressible flows." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5DCEHZC2

@misc{pith2026250606706,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Mixing for generic passive scalars by incompressible flows},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5DCEHZC2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.06706}
}
abstract

Mixing by incompressible flows is a ubiquitous yet incompletely understood phenomenon in fluid dynamics. While previous studies have focused on optimal mixing rates, the question of its genericity, i.e., whether mixing occurs for typical incompressible flows and typical initial data, remains mathematically unclear. In this paper, it is shown that classical mixing criteria, e.g. topological mixing or non-precompactness in $L^2$ for all nontrivial densities, fail to persist under arbitrarily small perturbations of velocity fields. A Young-measure theory adapted to $L^\infty$ data is then developed to characterize exactly which passive scalars mix. As a consequence, the existence of a single mixed density is equivalent to mixing for generic bounded data, and this equivalence is further tied to the non-precompactness of the associated measure-preserving flow maps in $L^p$. These results provide a foundation for a general theory of generic mixing in non-autonomous incompressible flows.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A uniqueness result for the conti- nuity equation in two dimensions

    Alberti, G., Bianchini, S., and Crippa, G. A uniqueness result for the conti- nuity equation in two dimensions. J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 16 , 2 (2014), 201–234

    work page 2014

  2. [2]

    Alberti, G., Crippa, G., and Mazzucato, A. L. Exponential self-similar mixing by incompressible flows. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 32 , 2 (2019), 445–490

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    Alberti, G., Crippa, G., and Mazzucato, A. L. Loss of regularity for the continuity equation with non-Lipschitz velocity field. Ann. PDE 5 , 1 (2019), Paper No. 9, 19

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Transport equation and Cauchy problem forBV vector fields

    Ambrosio, L. Transport equation and Cauchy problem forBV vector fields. Invent. Math. 158 , 2 (2004), 227–260

    work page 2004

  5. [5]

    Continuity equations and ODE flows with non- smooth velocity

    Ambrosio, L., and Crippa, G. Continuity equations and ODE flows with non- smooth velocity. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 144 , 6 (2014), 1191–1244

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    Stirring by chaotic advection

    Aref, H. Stirring by chaotic advection. J. Fluid Mech. 143 (1984), 1–21. 16

    work page 1984

  7. [7]

    Chemical Engineering Science 52 , 4 (1997), 457–466

    Ba ldyga, J., Bourne, J., and Hearn, S.Interaction between chemical reactions and mixing on various scales. Chemical Engineering Science 52 , 4 (1997), 457–466

    work page 1997

  8. [8]

    Ball, J. M. A version of the fundamental theorem for Young measures. In PDEs and continuum models of phase transitions (Nice, 1988) , vol. 344 of Lecture Notes in Phys. Springer, Berlin, 1989, pp. 207–215

    work page 1988

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    Enhanced dissipation and in- viscid damping in the inviscid limit of the Navier-Stokes equations near the two dimensional Couette flow

    Bedrossian, J., Masmoudi, N., and Vicol, V. Enhanced dissipation and in- viscid damping in the inviscid limit of the Navier-Stokes equations near the two dimensional Couette flow. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 219 , 3 (2016), 1087–1159

    2016

  2. [10]

    A generic incompressible flow is topological mixing

    Bessa, M. A generic incompressible flow is topological mixing. C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 346 , 21-22 (2008), 1169–1174

    2008

  3. [11]

    Nonasymptotic properties of transport and mixing

    Boffetta, G., Celani, A., Cencini, M., Lacorata, G., and Vulpiani, A. Nonasymptotic properties of transport and mixing. Chaos 10 , 1 (2000), 50–

    2000

  4. [12]

    Bogovski˘i, M. E. Solutions of some problems of vector analysis, associated with the operators div and grad. In Theory of cubature formulas and the application of functional analysis to problems of mathematical physics , vol. No. 1, 1980 of Proc. Sobolev Sem. Akad. Nauk SSSR S...

    1980

  5. [13]

    A lemma and a conjecture on the cost of rearrangements

    Bressan, A. A lemma and a conjecture on the cost of rearrangements. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 110 (2003), 97–102

    2003

  6. [14]

    Diffusion and mixing in fluid flow

    Constantin, P., Kiselev, A., Ryzhik, L., and Zlato ˇs, A. Diffusion and mixing in fluid flow. Ann. of Math. (2) 168 , 2 (2008), 643–674

    2008

  7. [15]

    Coti Zelati, M., Crippa, G., Iyer, G., and Mazzucato, A. L. Mixing in incompressible flows: transport, dissipation, and their interplay. Notices Amer. Math. Soc. 71, 5 (2024), 593–604

    2024

  8. [16]

    G., and Elgindi, T

    Coti Zelati, M., Delgadino, M. G., and Elgindi, T. M. On the relation between enhanced dissipation timescales and mixing rates. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 73, 6 (2020), 1205–1244

    2020

  9. [17]

    Estimates and regularity results for the DiPerna- Lions flow

    Crippa, G., and De Lellis, C. Estimates and regularity results for the DiPerna- Lions flow. J. Reine Angew. Math. 616 (2008), 15–46

    2008

  10. [18]

    Cullen, P. J. Food mixing: Principles and applications . John Wiley & Sons, 2009

    2009

  11. [19]

    J., and Lions, P.-L

    DiPerna, R. J., and Lions, P.-L. Ordinary differential equations, transport theory and Sobolev spaces. Invent. Math. 98 , 3 (1989), 511–547

    1989

  12. [20]

    D., and Elgindi, T

    Drivas, T. D., and Elgindi, T. M. Singularity formation in the incompressible Euler equation in finite and infinite time. EMS Surv. Math. Sci. 10 , 1 (2023), 1–100

    2023

  13. [21]

    D., Elgindi, T

    Drivas, T. D., Elgindi, T. M., Iyer, G., and Jeong, I.-J. Anomalous dissipa- tion in passive scalar transport. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 243, 3 (2022), 1151–1180. 17

    2022

  14. [22]

    M., and Liss, K

    Elgindi, T. M., and Liss, K. Norm growth, non-uniqueness, and anomalous dissipation in passive scalars. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 248 , 6 (2024), Paper No. 120, 28

    2024

  15. [23]

    M., and Zlato ˇs, A

    Elgindi, T. M., and Zlato ˇs, A. Universal mixers in all dimensions. Adv. Math. 356 (2019), 106807, 33

    2019

  16. [24]

    Dissipation enhancement by mixing

    Feng, Y., and Iyer, G. Dissipation enhancement by mixing. Nonlinearity 32, 5 (2019), 1810–1851

    2019

  17. [25]

    Galdi, G. P. An introduction to the mathematical theory of the Navier-Stokes equations, second ed. Springer Monographs in Mathematics. Springer, New York,

  18. [26]

    Mixing for generic rough shear flows

    Galeati, L., and Gubinelli, M. Mixing for generic rough shear flows. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 55 , 6 (2023), 7240–7272

    2023

  19. [27]

    Mixing in the ocean interior

    Garrett, C. Mixing in the ocean interior. Dynamics of Atmospheres and Oceans 3, 2-4 (1979), 239–265

    1979

  20. [28]

    Haynes, P. H. Transport and mixing in the atmosphere. In Mechanics of the 21st Century: Proceedings of the 21st International Congress of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Warsaw, Poland, 15–21 August 2004 (2005), Springer, pp. 139–152

    2005

  21. [29]

    Lower bounds on the mix norm of passive scalars advected by incompressible enstrophy-constrained flows

    Iyer, G., Kiselev, A., and Xu, X. Lower bounds on the mix norm of passive scalars advected by incompressible enstrophy-constrained flows. Nonlinearity 27, 5 (2014), 973–985

    2014

  22. [30]

    Kechris, A. S. Classical descriptive set theory , vol. 156 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1995

    1995

  23. [31]

    M., and Dimotakis, P

    Koochesfahani, M. M., and Dimotakis, P. E. Mixing and chemical reactions in a turbulent liquid mixing layer. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 170 (1986), 83–112

    1986

  24. [32]

    Lin, Z., Thiffeault, J.-L., and Doering, C. R. Optimal stirring strategies for passive scalar mixing. J. Fluid Mech. 675 (2011), 465–476

    2011

  25. [33]

    Mixing enhancement by optimal flow advection

    Liu, W. Mixing enhancement by optimal flow advection. SIAM J. Control Optim. 47, 2 (2008), 624–638

    2008

  26. [34]

    R.Op- timal mixing and optimal stirring for fixed energy, fixed power, or fixed palenstrophy flows

    Lunasin, E., Lin, Z., Novikov, A., Mazzucato, A., and Doering, C. R.Op- timal mixing and optimal stirring for fixed energy, fixed power, or fixed palenstrophy flows. J. Math. Phys. 53 , 11 (2012), 115611, 15

    2012

  27. [35]

    Optimal control of mixing in Stokes fluid flows

    Mathew, G., Mezi ´c, I., Grivopoulos, S., V aidya, U., and Petzold, L. Optimal control of mixing in Stokes fluid flows. J. Fluid Mech. 580 (2007), 261–281

    2007

  28. [36]

    A multiscale measure for mixing

    Mathew, G., Mezi ´c, I., and Petzold, L. A multiscale measure for mixing. Phys. D 211 , 1-2 (2005), 23–46

    2005

  29. [37]

    Non-uniqueness for the transport equation with Sobolev vector fields

    Modena, S., and Sz´ekelyhidi, Jr., L. Non-uniqueness for the transport equation with Sobolev vector fields. Ann. PDE 4 , 2 (2018), Paper No. 18, 38. 18

    2018

  30. [38]

    W., Edwards, M

    Nienow, A. W., Edwards, M. F., and Harnby, N. Mixing in the process industries. Butterworth-Heinemann, 1997

    1997

  31. [39]

    Ottino, J. M. The kinematics of mixing: stretching, chaos, and transport . Cam- bridge Texts in Applied Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989

    1989

  32. [40]

    Maximal mixing by incompressible fluid flows

    Seis, C. Maximal mixing by incompressible fluid flows. Nonlinearity 26, 12 (2013), 3279–3289

    2013

  33. [41]

    Shnirelman, A. I. Lattice theory and flows of ideal incompressible fluid. Russian J. Math. Phys. 1 , 1 (1993), 105–114

    1993

  34. [42]

    Course notes

    ˇSver´ak, V. Course notes. http://math.umn.edu/~sverak/course-notes2011, 2011/2012

    2011

  35. [43]

    Mixing and un-mixing by incompressible flows

    Yao, Y., and Zlatoˇs, A. Mixing and un-mixing by incompressible flows. J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 19 , 7 (2017), 1911–1948

    2017

  36. [44]

    Young, L. C. Generalized surfaces in the calculus of variations. Ann. of Math. (2) 43 (1942), 84–103. 19

    1942

  37. [60]

    Chaotic kinetics and transport (New York, 1998)

    1998

  38. [2011]

    Steady-state problems

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.