On taming Moffatt-Kimura vortices of doom in the viscous case

Zoran Grujic

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

On taming Moffatt-Kimura vortices of doom in the viscous case

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Viscous Moffatt-Kimura vortex rings avoid finite-time blow-up under a log-composite decay bound on intense vorticity regions.

desk verdict A clean but explicitly conditional criticality observation for the Moffatt–Kimura scenario, wrapped in an honest note whose load-bearing hypothesis remains unproved. read the letter →

arxiv 2511.00725 v3 pith:4PADDVE7 submitted 2025-11-01 math.AP math-phmath.MP

Zoran Grujic This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.APmath-phmath.MP MSC 35Q3076D0535B44

keywords Moffatt-Kimuravortexringsfinite-timeblow-upNavier-Stokesregularityvorticitydirectionscaleofsparsenessradiusspatialanalyticityharmonicmeasurelog-compositeweights

topics Navier-Stokes Regularity

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 tries to establish that a specific, physically motivated blow-up scenario for the 3D Navier-Stokes equations is actually tame in the viscous case. In the Moffatt-Kimura setup, two counter-rotating vortex rings collide at an angle and the reduced model suggests vorticity could grow without bound. The author proposes a two-layer viscous mechanism: first, the scenario is shown to be at worst critical, meaning the scale of sparseness of intense vorticity regions is comparable to the analyticity radius; second, if the volume of these regions decays with a log-composite rate, a harmonic measure argument forbids blow-up outright. The central result is a theorem: under that a priori decay bound, vorticity magnitude stays bounded and no finite-time singularity forms. A sympathetic reader cares because it isolates a concrete geometric-analytic condition sufficient to defuse a long-studied singularity scenario.

What carries the argument

The key machinery is the comparison of two length scales near a possible singular time: the scale of sparseness of the vorticity super-level sets — roughly the diameter of the most intense vortex cores — and the radius of spatial analyticity of the solution, which is the natural viscous dissipation scale. The paper couples this comparison with the harmonic measure maximum principle: if the super-level set is sparse in one direction at a scale no larger than the analyticity radius, then the vorticity at the center cannot exceed a controlled bound. The log-composite weighted local bmo spaces provide the quantitative measure of how rapidly local mean oscillations of the vorticity direction deca

What would settle it

Run a high-resolution simulation of viscous reconnection in the Moffatt-Kimura configuration and measure the mean oscillation of the vorticity direction field over cubes of side length r shrinking toward the collision region: Ω(ξ, I(x,r)) should decrease roughly like 1/log_k(|log r|). If instead it stays bounded below by a constant independent of r — the behavior at a jump discontinuity — then the premise of Theorem 4.6 is not met for that flow.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The core claim is Theorem 4.6: in the Moffatt-Kimura scenario, if the a priori vorticity super-level bound (3.1) holds — namely that the volume of the set where |ω(x,t)| > λ||ω(t)||_∞ is bounded by a constant times φ_k(||ω(t)||_∞)/||ω(t)||_∞ for a log-composite weight φ_k — then the vorticity magnitude remains bounded and finite-time blow-up is avoided. The proof combines three ingredients: a lower bound on the radius of spatial analyticity of the vorticity, the geometric sparseness of the super-level sets (derived from the log-composite decay and the ring-tube geometry), and the harmonic measure maximum principle, which converts 1D sparseness at the analyticity scale into a pointwise bound

Load-bearing premise

The result collapses if the vorticity direction field does not actually enjoy log-composite decay of its local mean oscillations, because the paper assumes the super-level volume bound (3.1) rather than proving it, and it also relies on the geometric assumption that vortex cores remain compact and nearly circular throughout the evolution.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the a priori bound (3.1) holds, the vorticity magnitude in the viscous Moffatt-Kimura scenario remains bounded, so no finite-time singularity forms.
Without the log-composite improvement, the scenario is critical: the sparseness scale and the analyticity radius have the same growth rate, so viscous dissipation only wins if the initial Reynolds number Γ/ν is of order one.
A logarithmic improvement of the L^1 vorticity bound, obtained from log-composite decay of vorticity-direction oscillations, breaks criticality and pushes the sparseness scale into the dissipation range.
If the mechanism is realized, the crossover to sub-criticality would happen at vorticity levels that are tetrations of the Reynolds number, making the effect practically invisible in direct numerical simulations.

Reading between the lines

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

The same two-layer logic could be applied to other vortex-stretching blow-up scenarios, provided the vortex structures remain compact and the vorticity direction develops log-composite oscillation decay; the paper hints at this extension but does not develop it.
A direct numerical test is possible: track the mean oscillation of the vorticity direction over shrinking cubes during high-Reynolds viscous reconnection. Decay like 1/log_k(|log r|) would support the second layer, while oscillation saturating at order one (as in a jump) would falsify the premise.
The inviscid analogue remains untouched: without an analyticity radius and without shear-stress-induced taming of oscillations, the tent-like jump discontinuity keeps the inviscid case merely critical, so the argument does not transfer to Euler.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The short version: this is a well-structured research note whose main value is the criticality comparison, not the theorem. Grujic observes that in the Moffatt–Kimura scenario the core scale δ(t) ≈ Γ^{1/2}/||ω||_∞^{1/2} and the analyticity radius ρ(t) ≈ ν^{1/2}/||ω||_∞^{1/2} shrink at the same rate, so the dissipation scale is only reached when Γ/ν ≈ 1. That observation is clean, new to me, and worth citing on its own.

The conditional theorem (4.6) is honestly labeled. If you grant the a priori super-level decay (3.1), the harmonic-measure argument closes with the tuned constants given. The paper also deserves credit for spelling out in Section 5 exactly what is missing: a proof that viscous reconnection forces the vorticity direction into a log-composite gbmo class. That is the whole game, and the author says so plainly.

The soft spots are the usual ones for this kind of note. (3.1) comes from prior work [9], so the theorem is really a reduction of blow-up prevention to an oscillation-decay bound rather than a no-blow-up result. The step from (3.1) to the sparseness scale (4.4) is asserted more than derived, relying on an unquantified appeal to the MK tube geometry. If the cores flatten and strip, the exponent 1/2 may need justification, though the author's remark that flattening only helps sparseness is plausible but not rigorous.

Is this serious work? Yes. It is a genuine attempt to connect geometric criticality, analyticity radius, and vorticity-direction oscillations. It does not overclaim, and the open problem it identifies is sharply posed. The final tetration remark about detectability is speculative but flagged as such.

I would send this to review. It is a note, not a full paper, and a referee could reasonably ask for a more careful derivation of (4.4) and a clearer statement that the theorem is conditional on an unproved geometric–analytic hypothesis. But the criticality observation alone justifies publication in a special issue.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a two-layer viscous mechanism to prevent finite-time singularity formation in the Moffatt-Kimura scenario of two colliding counter-rotating vortex rings. Layer one (Section 2) compares the model-based vortex-core diameter δ(t) ≈ Γ^{1/2}/||ω(t)||_∞^{1/2} with the analyticity radius ρ(t) ≈ ν^{1/2}/||ω(t)||_∞^{1/2}, showing the scenario is at best critical and that crossover requires Γ/ν ≈ 1. Layer two (Sections 3–4) argues that if the vorticity direction lies in a log-composite weighted local bmo space, then an improved a priori volume-decay bound (3.1) holds, yielding a sparseness scale r_s that is logarithmically smaller than ρ(t). Theorem 4.6 then uses the harmonic measure maximum principle to conclude that, under (3.1), the L∞ norm of vorticity remains bounded and blow-up is avoided. Section 5 explicitly states that the key input to (3.1), namely log-composite decay of the mean oscillations of the vorticity direction, is not proved here and remains open.

Significance. If the conditional theorem is accepted together with the claimed geometric and analytic inputs, the paper provides a concrete, rigorous route to singularity prevention in a physically motivated vortex configuration. The harmonic-measure argument is explicit and self-contained, with tunable constants given in (4.2), and the paper honestly identifies the missing hypothesis. The result is a clean reduction: an open regularity question for the viscous MK scenario is reduced to a quantitative bmo-regularity condition on the vorticity direction. The main value is therefore conditional, but the reduction is nontrivial and potentially useful. The paper also usefully highlights the gap between the inviscid tent-like discontinuity and the viscous shear-driven scenario, and it gives a quantitative estimate of how difficult the crossover would be to observe numerically.

major comments (3)

[Section 5; Theorem 4.6] The central theorem is conditional on the a priori bound (3.1), which is not proved for the Moffatt-Kimura scenario. The paper itself states in Section 5: "what remains to be shown is that the viscous mechanics will indeed yield a log-composite bound on the rate of decay of the bounded mean oscillations of the vorticity direction field." Thus the advertised conclusion "a finite time blow-up is avoided" is not established from the equations of motion; it is a consequence of an unverified hypothesis inherited from [9]. This is load-bearing: if only the trivial gbmo_1 bound holds, (3.1) is false with log-composite φ_k and the mechanism collapses. The theorem should be restated as a conditional reduction, and the abstract/title should not imply an unconditional proof of singularity prevention.
[Section 4, eq. (4.4)] The conversion of the global volume bound (3.1) into the local 3D sparseness scale r_s is asserted via "the geometry of Moffatt-Kimura scenario," but no precise geometric hypothesis is stated and no proof is given. A global estimate |{x: |ω(x,s)| > λ||ω(s)||_∞}| ≤ c φ_k(L)/L does not, by itself, imply that in every ball of radius r_s the super-level set occupies at most a fixed fraction of the ball; one needs a localization assumption (e.g., that the super-level set is contained in a tube of length O(R) and that the volume concentrates in cross-sections of diameter r_s). The paper acknowledges the flattening/stripping observed in DNS [20], but then merely asserts that this would make the set sparser. To be a theorem, (4.4) requires a lemma with explicit geometric hypotheses and a derivation; without it the harmonic-measure argument lacks a premise.
[Section 4, proof of Theorem 4.6] The proof selects "an escape time t for which ρ_s ≥ r_s" without showing that such a time exists. In a blow-up scenario one would need to prove that, for some (or, as it turns out, all sufficiently late) escape times, the analyticity radius dominates the sparseness scale. This is not immediate: although φ_k(L) → 0 implies r_s is asymptotically smaller than ρ_s for large L, the relationship between the escape time t and the later time s = t + T_t, and the dependence of T_t on ||ω(t)||_∞, need to be made explicit. Without this, the argument only shows that IF the inequality holds at some point, then no blow-up can occur afterward; the contradiction with the existence of a blow-up time is not fully established.

minor comments (4)

[Section 4, proof of Theorem 4.6] Typo: "The the solution at s" should be "The solution at s." Also, the phrase "1D 3/4^{1/3}-sparse" should be "1D (3/4)^{1/3}-sparse" (or should refer to 3D 3/4-sparseness) to match the notation in Definition 4.1.
[Section 4, eq. (4.3)–(4.4)] The constants c_3 and c_4 appear without definition. Please state that they are positive absolute constants (or depend only on the indicated quantities) and clarify their origin.
[Section 2] The notation δ(t) is used for vortex-core diameter while δ is also used for the sparseness parameter in Section 4. This is potentially confusing; consider renaming one of them.
[General] The paper would benefit from a short statement near the abstract explicitly labeling Theorem 4.6 as conditional on (3.1), to avoid the impression that an unconditional no-blow-up result is proved.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

Conditional theorem with an acknowledged open hypothesis—no circular reduction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is conditional, not circular. Theorem 4.6 states: “Consider Moffatt-Kimura scenario in the viscous case and suppose that the a priori bound (3.1) holds. Then the vorticity magnitude remains bounded and a finite time blow-up is avoided.” The a priori bound (3.1), a super-level-volume decay estimate inherited from the author’s prior theorem [9], is an explicit hypothesis of the main result, not a consequence manufactured by the proof. The cited result [9] is a published, parameter-free theorem with stated assumptions (the vorticity direction belongs to a log-composite weighted gbmo space); it does not assume the conclusion of Theorem 4.6. Section 5 candidly admits the missing piece: “what remains to be shown is that the viscous mechanics will indeed yield a log-composite bound on the rate of decay of the bounded mean oscillations of the vorticity direction field.” That is an open hypothesis/gap, not a circular step. The criticality comparison in Section 2 uses the Moffatt–Kimura reduced-model relation δ(t)≈ Γ^{1/2}/‖ω(t)‖_∞^{1/2} and the analyticity-radius theorem [3] as independent inputs; neither quantity is defined in terms of the other. The harmonic-measure argument in Section 4 begins with (3.1), the conversion to a sparseness scale (4.4), and Propositions 4.3–4.5; if the geometric conversion (4.4) is not justified for flattened or stripped cores, that is an unsupported assumption, not a definitional equivalence. The self-citations ([3], [4], [9]) are published mathematical results with stated assumptions that do not include the target result, so under the review rules they are independent support rather than circularity. No step reduces a claimed prediction to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 9 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The note is an architecture: a conditional no-blow-up theorem assembled from published results (analyticity radius [3], Orlicz-type integrability [9], harmonic measure [18,19]) plus an explicitly unverified dynamical hypothesis. The operative inputs are (i) the MK ring/compact-core geometry and (ii) bound (3.1) — equivalently the stipulation that the vorticity direction attains log-composite oscillation decay. The constants δ, λ, M are tuned for the maximum-principle argument to close, and the weight family φ_k is a free modeling choice. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)

δ (1D sparseness threshold) = 3/4
Hand-chosen so that the harmonic-measure closing equation (4.2) is solvable with M > 1; enters the 3D→1D sparseness conversion and Solynin's extremal estimate.
λ (super-level cutoff) = 1/(2M), M ≈ 1.03
Chosen in (4.1)/(4.2) so that on the 'good' boundary set the vorticity bound is ||ω(t)||∞/2, making the maximum-principle output exactly ||ω(t)||∞.
M (analyticity and closing constant) = ≈1.03, solution of (1/2)h* + (1−h*)M = 1
Used both in the analyticity theorem (Thm 4.5) and in the harmonic-measure closing; determined by the choices of δ and λ.
weight family φ_k(r) = 1/log_k(|log r|) = k arbitrary positive integer
The assumed strength of the vorticity-direction oscillation decay; the theorem holds for any fixed k, but the paper does not specify which k, if any, the MK dynamics actually provides.

assumptions (9)

domain assumption Moffatt-Kimura reduced model: vortex cores remain mostly compact and nearly circular through Phase II
Used in §2 to identify δ(t) ≈ Γ^{1/2}/L^{1/2} with the sparseness scale; the paper notes the assumption originates in [16] and is challenged by the DNS of [20].
domain assumption The a priori super-level decay (3.1) holds up to the potential blow-up time
The hypothesis of Theorem 4.6. It follows from [9] only if the vorticity direction stays in gbmo_{φ_k}, which the paper does not prove; §5 admits 'what remains to be shown'.
ad hoc to paper Viscous reconnection shear stress drives the vorticity direction into log-composite weighted bmo spaces
The layer-2 stipulation; justified only heuristically via the Yao-Hussain reconnection 'avalanche' figures and explicitly marked as unproven in §5.
standard math Harmonic measure maximum principle for subharmonic functions (Prop 4.3)
Quoted from Ransford [18]; the core potential-theoretic engine of the proof of Theorem 4.6.
standard math Solynin extremal property of harmonic measure (Prop 4.4)
Quoted from [19]; supplies the quantitative lower bound h* used in the closing equation (4.2).
domain assumption Local-in-time lower bound on the radius of spatial analyticity of the vorticity field (Thm 4.5)
Quoted from [3]; gives ρ(t) ≈ ν^{1/2}/||ω(t)||_∞^{1/2} in §2 and (4.3) in §4. A published prior theorem (co-authored by the present author), treated as independent support.
domain assumption Constantin's a priori L^1 vorticity bound
Quoted from [5]; the base of the super-level volume decay estimate in §3.
domain assumption Theorem of [9]: vorticity direction in gbmo_{φ_k} implies L^1_{φ_k(L)} integrability and the super-level bound (3.1)
Prior published theorem (co-authored by the present author); supplies (3.1) conditionally on the direction condition. Not re-derived in this note.
domain assumption Vorticity super-level sets have ring-tube geometry with fixed macro-scale R
Needed to convert volume decay (3.1) into the sparseness scale r_s = c_4(φ_k(L)/L)^{1/2} at (4.4); asserted as 'the geometry of Moffatt-Kimura scenario imply' with no derivation in the note.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On taming Moffatt-Kimura vortices of doom in the viscous case." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4PADDVE7

@misc{pith2026251100725,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On taming Moffatt-Kimura vortices of doom in the viscous case},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4PADDVE7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.00725}
}

read the original abstract

In this note we propose a two-layer viscous mechanism for preventing finite time singularity formation in the Moffatt-Kimura model of two counter-rotating vortex rings colliding at a nontrivial angle. In the first layer the scenario is recast within the framework of the study of turbulent dissipation based on a suitably defined `scale of sparseness' of the regions of intense fluid activity. Here it is found that the problem is (at worst) critical, i.e., the upper bound on the scale of sparseness of the vorticity super-level sets is comparable to the lower bound on the radius of spatial analyticity. In the second layer, an additional more subtle mechanism is identified, potentially capable of driving the scale of sparseness into the dissipation range and preventing the formation of a singularity. The mechanism originates in certain analytic cancellation properties of the vortex-stretching term in the sense of compensated compactness in Hardy spaces which then convert information on local mean oscillations of the vorticity direction (boundedness in certain log-composite weighted local bmo spaces) into log-composite faster decay of the vorticity super-level sets.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.00725 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** initial configuration [17] and Hussain [20] performed a DNS study initialized at the Moffatt-Kimura initial configuration and observed that – in Phase II – there seems to be significant flattening and stripping of the vortex cores which would be inconsistent with the model. Moreover they argued that the formation of bridges during the viscous reconnection ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** viscous reconnection, bridges and threads at Re = 4000 [20] range. Since any quantification of the possible gain of sparseness due to the formation of bridges and threads in the process of viscous reconnection is out of reach, we propose to explore a different route to (possibly) braking the criticality – the one based on the study of local mean oscillations of the vorticity direction. The significance of the vortic… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** viscous reconnection, avalanche at Re = 40000 [21] Let us denote the mean oscillation of a function f over the cube I = I(x, r) centered at x with the side length 2r by Ω(f, I(x, r)) = 1 |I(x, r)| ˆ I(x,r) |f(x) − fI | dx where fI is the mean value of f over I. Assuming that f ∈ L 1 we can focus on small scales, say 0 < r < 1 2 , and define the local weighted space of functions of bounded mean oscillations bmo gϕ as… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: a sketch of the inviscid blow-up generated using Google AI tools This setting also points to another, more geometric/topological contrast between inviscid and viscous Moffatt-Kimura scenarios (compared to no smoothing vs. analytic smoothing). In the inviscid case – due…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Logarithmic Depletion of Vortex Stretching and Singularity Evasion in the 3D Navier-Stokes Equations
math.AP 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

If vorticity direction lies in log-weighted bmo and the profile is a critical point singularity, logarithmic depletion of stretching plus harmonic measure rules out finite-time blow-up.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

21 extracted references · cited by 1 Pith paper

[9]

Y. Do, A. Farhat, Z. Gruji´ c and L. Xu. Oscillations and integrability of the vorticity in the 3D NS flows.Indiana Univ. Math. J.,69, 1559–1578 (2020)

2020
[20]

Yao and F

J. Yao and F. Hussain. On singularity formation via viscous reconnection.J. Fluid Mech,888, R2 (2020)

2020
[1]

Beir˜ ao da Veiga and L.C

H. Beir˜ ao da Veiga and L.C. Berselli. On the regularizing effect of the vorticity direction in incompressible viscous flows.Differential Integral Equations,15, 345–356 (2002) 12

2002
[2]

Beir˜ ao da Veiga, Y

H. Beir˜ ao da Veiga, Y. Giga and Z. Gruji´ c. Vorticity direction and regularity of solutions to the Navier-Stokes equations.Handbook of Mathematical Analysis in Mechanics of Viscous Fluids, Springer, 2016

2016
[3]

Bradshaw, A

Z. Bradshaw, A. Farhat and Z. Gruji´ c. An algebraic reduction of the ‘scaling gap’ in the Navier–Stokes regularity problem.Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal.,231(3), 1983–2005 (2019)

1983
[4]

Bradshaw and Z

Z. Bradshaw and Z. Gruji´ c. A spatially localizedLlogLestimate on the vorticity in the 3D NSE.Indiana Univ. Math. J.,64, 433–440 (2015)

2015
[5]

Constantin

P. Constantin. Navier-Stokes equations and area of interfaces.Comm. Math. Phys.,129(2), 241–266 (1990)

1990
[6]

Constantin

P. Constantin. Geometric statistics in turbulence.SIAM Rev.,36(1), 73–98 (1994)

1994

Show all 21 references

[7]

Constantin and C

P. Constantin and C. Fefferman. Direction of vorticity and the problem of global regularity for the Navier-Stokes equations.Indiana Univ. Math. J.,42(3), 775–789 (1993)

1993
[8]

Dascaliuc and Z

R. Dascaliuc and Z. Gruji´ c. Coherent vortex structures and 3D enstrophy cascade.Comm. Math. Phys,317, 547–561 (2013)

2013
[10]

Giga and H

Y. Giga and H. Miura. On vorticity directions near singularities for the Navier-Stokes flows with infinite energy.Comm. Math. Phys.,303(2), 289–300 (2011)

2011
[11]

Gruji´ c

Z. Gruji´ c. Localization and geometric depletion of vortex-stretching in the 3D NSE.Comm. Math. Phys.,290(3), 861–870 (2009)

2009
[12]

Gruji´ c

Z. Gruji´ c. A geometric measure-type regularity criterion for solutions to the 3D Navier-Stokes equations.Nonlinearity,26(1), 289–296 (2013)

2013
[13]

Gruji´ c and L

Z. Gruji´ c and L. Xu. Asymptotic criticality of the Navier-Stokes regularity problem.J. Math. Fluid Mech.,26(53) (2024)

2024
[14]

Gruji´ c and L

Z. Gruji´ c and L. Xu. Time-global regularity of the Navier-Stokes system with hyper-dissipation: turbulent scenario.Ann. PDE,11(9) (2025)

2025
[15]

Moffatt and Y

K. Moffatt and Y. Kimura. Towards a finite-time singularity of the Navier-Stokes equations Part 1. Derivation and analysis of dynamical system.J. Fluid Mech,861, 930–967 (2019)

2019
[16]

Moffatt and Y

K. Moffatt and Y. Kimura. Towards a finite-time singularity of the Navier-Stokes equations. Part 2. Vortex reconnection and singularity evasion.J. Fluid Mech,870, R1 (2019)

2019
[17]

Moffatt and Y

K. Moffatt and Y. Kimura. Towards a finite-time singularity of the Navier-Stokes equations. Part 3. Maximal vorticity amplification.J. Fluid Mech,967, R1 (2023)

2023
[18]

Ransford.Potential theory in the complex plane, volume 28 ofLondon Mathematical Society Student Texts

T. Ransford.Potential theory in the complex plane, volume 28 ofLondon Mathematical Society Student Texts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995. 13

1995
[19]

A. Y. Solynin. Ordering of sets, hyperbolic metric, and harmonic measure.Zap. Nauchn. Sem. S.-Peterburg. Otdel. Mat. Inst. Steklov. (POMI),237(Anal. Teor. Chisel i Teor. Funkts.14): 129–147, 230, 1997

1997
[21]

Yao and F

J. Yao and F. Hussain. A physical model of turbulence cascade via vortex reconnection sequence and avalanche.J. Fluid Mech,883, A51 (2020) 14

2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [9]

Y. Do, A. Farhat, Z. Gruji´ c and L. Xu. Oscillations and integrability of the vorticity in the 3D NS flows.Indiana Univ. Math. J.,69, 1559–1578 (2020)

2020

[2] [20]

Yao and F

J. Yao and F. Hussain. On singularity formation via viscous reconnection.J. Fluid Mech,888, R2 (2020)

2020

[3] [1]

Beir˜ ao da Veiga and L.C

H. Beir˜ ao da Veiga and L.C. Berselli. On the regularizing effect of the vorticity direction in incompressible viscous flows.Differential Integral Equations,15, 345–356 (2002) 12

2002

[4] [2]

Beir˜ ao da Veiga, Y

H. Beir˜ ao da Veiga, Y. Giga and Z. Gruji´ c. Vorticity direction and regularity of solutions to the Navier-Stokes equations.Handbook of Mathematical Analysis in Mechanics of Viscous Fluids, Springer, 2016

2016

[5] [3]

Bradshaw, A

Z. Bradshaw, A. Farhat and Z. Gruji´ c. An algebraic reduction of the ‘scaling gap’ in the Navier–Stokes regularity problem.Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal.,231(3), 1983–2005 (2019)

1983

[6] [4]

Bradshaw and Z

Z. Bradshaw and Z. Gruji´ c. A spatially localizedLlogLestimate on the vorticity in the 3D NSE.Indiana Univ. Math. J.,64, 433–440 (2015)

2015

[7] [5]

Constantin

P. Constantin. Navier-Stokes equations and area of interfaces.Comm. Math. Phys.,129(2), 241–266 (1990)

1990

[8] [6]

Constantin

P. Constantin. Geometric statistics in turbulence.SIAM Rev.,36(1), 73–98 (1994)

1994