Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 48 references

Long-wave instability of periodic shear flows with constant magnetic field for the 2D resistive MHD equations

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that long-wave instabilities of a 2D resistive MHD shear flow in a constant magnetic field are governed by an explicit threshold on a weighted norm of the shear profile, with growth rates of order (αk)².

desk verdict Solid rigorous extension of [15] to resistive MHD with real new thresholds, but the abstract should be restricted to the physically meaningful b2=0 case. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.25836 v1 pith:E5HPYOG2 submitted 2026-07-28 math.AP math-phmath.MP

Roberto Feola , Luca Franzoi , Riccardo Montalto , Claudia Peña This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.APmath-phmath.MP MSC 35Q3576W0576E2535P15
keywords resistiveMHDlong-waveinstabilityshearflowspectralstabilitynormalformvorticity-currentformulationmagneticPrandtlnumberzero-modebifurcation
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

This paper establishes a rigorous, parameter-explicit linear instability criterion for a periodic shear flow (U(y),0) in the 2D resistive MHD equations under a constant background magnetic field b=(b1,b2), in the long-wave regime where the horizontal wavenumber αk is small. The central claim is that instability is decided by a single weighted L2 norm of the shear profile: if resistivity exceeds viscosity (η>ν), a pair of eigenvalues with positive real part emerges exactly when ⟨(Id−b2²/(νη)B_y^{-2})^{-1}B_y^{-1}U, B_y^{-1}U⟩ exceeds (ν+η)νη/(η−ν); when b1=0, one eigenvalue destabilizes above the threshold ν², while for ν≥η the flow is stable for small α. The proof decouples the zero Fourier mode from the others by a non-perturbative block transformation and computes sharp ε²-asymptotics for the bifurcating eigenvalues. A caveat the authors state explicitly: only b2=0 gives an exact steady state, so the physically meaningful instability is the horizontal-field case. If correct, the result provides explicit growth rates of order (αk)², a stable/unstable splitting of phase space, and a direct MHD analogue of the classical Navier–Stokes long-wave instability theory.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing tool is a non-perturbative normal form: the operator L_{ν,η,ε} is conjugated by the block map T=[[Id₀,T₂],[T₃,Id_K]] (T₂ of order ε³, T₃ of order ε^{-1}) into a block-diagonal form whose zero-mode corner is a 2×2 matrix M^{(0)}_{ν,η}(ε). The eigenvalues of M^{(0)} are then computed by expansion to order ε²; their real part is controlled by the trace, which contains the Fourier multiplier W_KK=(Id−b2²/(νη)B_y^{-2})^{-1} applied to B_y^{-1}U. The non-zero-mode corner is handled by diagonalizing D_KK=[[ν∂_y²,b2∂_y],[b2∂_y,η∂_y²]], whose eigenvalues have real part ≤−σ j², and a perturbation argument shows the off-diagonal coupling of size O(ε) cannot destroy that stability. The

What would settle it

Take U(y)=sin(y), set b1=1, b2=0, fix η>ν, and compute the spectrum of the discretized L_{ν,η,ε} for ε→0. If the real parts of the two leading eigenvalues do not approach (ε²/2)[−(ν+η)+(1/ν−1/η)‖B_y^{-1}U‖²_{L2}]+O(ε³), or if unstable eigenvalues appear when ‖B_y^{-1}U‖²_{L2}≤(ν+η)νη/(η−ν), the main theorem is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.1: for the linearized operator on the k-th Fourier mode, all non-zero modes are stable, while the zero mode can destabilize as ε=αk→0 exactly when an explicit weighted norm of the shear profile exceeds threshold. For b1≠0, η>ν, the threshold is ⟨(Id−b2²/(νη)B_y^{-2})^{-1}B_y^{-1}U, B_y^{-1}U⟩ > (ν+η)νη/(η−ν), giving two simple unstable eigenvalues; for b1=0 the threshold is ν², giving one; for b1≠0, ν≥η, all eigenvalues have negative real part. Growth rates satisfy Re μ± = (ε²/2)[−(ν+η)+(1/ν−1/η)⟨W_KK B_y^{-1}U,B_y^{-1}U⟩]+O(ε³), with W_KK=(Id−b2²/(νη)B_y^{-2})^{-1}.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the linearized operator being analyzed represents the linearization around a genuine steady state; this holds only for b2=0, since for b2≠0 the induction equation produces an error term b2U''(y) that no divergence-free magnetic forcing can compensate.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the threshold (1.9) holds for b1≠0 and η>ν, the linear evolution splits phase space into a two-dimensional unstable subspace with growth e^{ε²ct} and an infinite-dimensional stable subspace with uniform exponential decay.
  • If b1=0 and (1.10) holds, there is exactly one unstable direction with the same ε² growth rate, and the stable subspace still decays exponentially.
  • If ν≥η with b1≠0, the shear flow is linearly stable for all sufficiently small long-wave wavenumbers, so resistivity-dominated diffusion (η>ν) is necessary for this instability.
  • In the zero-field limit b1=b2=0, the criterion reduces to the Navier–Stokes condition ‖B_y^{-1}U‖_{L2}²>ν², recovering the classical long-wave instability theory for periodic shear flows.
  • The explicit eigenvalue asymptotics μ±=ε²c+O(ε³) give a quantitative prediction for growth rates that can be checked in numerical experiments.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A physical extension the authors leave implicit: to make the b2≠0 case meaningful one would need a stationary background with a non-vanishing equilibrium current that cancels the error term b2U''; the spectral machinery here could then be rerun on that exact state.
  • Because the threshold only involves the Fourier multiplier W_KK, profiles with most of their B_y^{-1}U-energy in low modes destabilize at smaller amplitude; ranking profiles by this norm gives a testable ordering of instability onset.
  • The ε² growth-rate scaling matches the classical Navier–Stokes rate, so at the nonlinear level one expects unstable modes to evolve on a time scale of order ε^{-2}; whether this leads to a selected pattern wavelength remains open.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the linear spectral stability of the 2D resistive MHD equations (1.1) on a periodic strip, around a shear flow (U(y),0) with a constant background magnetic field b=(b1,b2). The authors introduce the operator L_{ν,η,ε} in (1.7), conjugate it through a non-perturbative normal-form transformation, and derive explicit ε-expansions of the low-frequency (zero-mode) eigenvalues. Under explicit inequalities involving U, ν, η and b, they prove existence of one or two unstable eigenvalues and uniform spectral stability of the remaining (non-zero mode) spectrum. Theorems 1.1 and 1.3 are stated for general b, with the caveat in Remark 1.5 that the base state is stationary only when b2=0.

Significance. If the results are read in the physically meaningful regime b2=0, the paper gives a substantial and explicit extension of the long-wave instability theory of Colombo–Dolce–Montalto–Ventura to resistive MHD. The proof is detailed and internally coherent: the contraction argument for the normal form (Proposition 4.1), the zero-mode expansion (Proposition 4.7), the eigenvalue formulas (Proposition 4.9), and the uniform spectral gap for non-zero modes (Lemma 5.2) are all checkable and do not rely on hidden fitting parameters. The paper also provides explicit thresholds and asymptotic growth rates, which are falsifiable predictions of the linearized model. However, the advertised physical statement is broader than what is proved: for b2≠0 the base state is not a solution of (1.1), as the authors themselves show in Remark 1.5, so the b2≠0 spectral results concern an auxiliary operator rather than instability of an MHD equilibrium.

major comments (2)
  1. [§1.2, Theorem 1.1 and Remark 1.5] The abstract and Theorem 1.1 present instability results for a general constant magnetic field b=(b1,b2), but Remark 1.5 proves that for b2≠0 the pair ((U,0),b) is not a stationary solution of (1.1). The induction equation produces the uncancellable error term b2U''(y) (eq. (1.18)), and an electromagnetic forcing of the form ∇×g cannot compensate it in 2D. Consequently, the operator L_{ν,η,ε} in (1.6)–(1.7) is obtained by dropping a source term and is not the Fréchet derivative of the MHD vector field at an equilibrium. The unstable eigenvalues in Theorem 1.1(i)–(ii) for b2≠0 do not by themselves imply instability of the base state in the original PDE. Because the conditions (1.9)–(1.10) depend on b2 through W_KK, this is a substantive restriction, not a cosmetic one. The paper should either state Theorem 1.1 only for b2=0 or explicitly label all b2≠0 spectral results as auxiliary non-eq
  2. [§1.2, Theorem 1.3 and eq. (1.5)] The dynamical statements in Theorem 1.3 are formulated for solutions of the Cauchy problem (1.11) for the operator L_{ν,η,ε}. For b2≠0 this is not the linearized evolution of the MHD system around the base state: the perturbation equation (1.5) contains the constant term −b2U''(y) in the current equation, which is not part of L_{ν,η,ε}. Therefore the invariant subspaces U_ε and S_ε in Theorem 1.3 are invariant subspaces of an auxiliary linear operator, not unstable/stable manifolds of the original PDE near the non-equilibrium base state. This should be stated explicitly wherever Theorem 1.3 is advertised.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§1.2, eq. (1.18)] The notation U^2(y) and U^3(y) is ambiguous. It should be written as U''(y) and U'''(y), respectively, to avoid confusion with powers of U.
  2. [Proposition 4.9(i)] The phrase 'two positive eigenvalues μ± with positive real part' is inaccurate: for b1≠0 the eigenvalues are complex. It should read 'two eigenvalues with positive real part'.
  3. [Proposition 4.9(iii)] The constant c in the statement is not defined consistently with the proof. The proof gives Re μ± = −(ε²/2)[ν+η+(1/η−1/ν)A]+O(ε³), so c should be defined as (1/2)[ν+η+(1/η−1/ν)A], which is ≥(ν+η)/2, not ≥(ν+η)/4 as written. The stability conclusion is unaffected.
  4. [Lemma 4.11 proof] Typo: 'Cachy problem' should be 'Cauchy problem'.
  5. [Theorem 1.1 statement] The zero-mean assumption ∫_T U dy = 0 is made in (1.2) but not repeated in the statement of Theorem 1.1. It should be stated explicitly, since the inverse B_y^{-1} U is used.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No substantive circularity: the instability criteria are derived from explicit spectral/normal-form expansions, and the self-citation to [15] is methodological rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained at the level of the claims made. The paper starts from the linearized operator L_{\nu,\eta,\varepsilon} in (1.7), performs a block decomposition, constructs a normal-form transformation T, computes the 2x2 zero-mode matrix M^{(0)}_{\nu,\eta}(\varepsilon) to order \varepsilon^2, and derives the instability thresholds (1.9), (1.10) from the eigenvalue asymptotics in Proposition 4.9. No parameter is fitted to the predicted eigenvalues; the thresholds are explicit functions of the inputs \nu, \eta, b, U and arise from the expansion itself. The proof cites [15] for the normal-form strategy, and the authors overlap with Montalto, but the MHD normal-form construction, the zero-mode computation, and the nonzero-mode spectral stability argument are carried out in this paper rather than imported as a black box. The b->0 limit reduces to the Navier-Stokes result of [15], which is a consistency check rather than an assumption. The acknowledged limitation in Remark 1.5—that the b2 != 0 base state is not a stationary solution of (1.1)—is a physical-relevance and correctness-interpretation issue, not a circularity in the spectral derivation. No renaming, fitted-input-as-prediction, or imported uniqueness step is present. The heavy self-citation is notable but not load-bearing, so the circularity score is low.

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

The central claim is a theorem about a linear operator, not a fit. All quantities are inputs or derived constants. The only non-physical ingredient is the b2 ≠ 0 base state, explicitly flagged by the authors.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The resistive MHD model (1.1) in vorticity-current form is the governing system
    Section 1; the derivation is referenced to [20], not re-derived.
  • domain assumption U ∈ C^{S+2}(T) with zero mean and external force f = νU'''
    Assumed in Theorem 1.1; needed for Sobolev algebra estimates and for the momentum equation to be stationary.
  • standard math Standard functional-analytic tools: contraction mapping theorem, Neumann series, compact spectral theory
    Used in Prop 4.1, Lemma 5.2, and Lemma 5.3.
  • domain assumption The b2 ≠ 0 base state is studied mathematically even though it is not a physical equilibrium
    Remark 1.5: the state solves the momentum equation but induces error −b2U''(y) in the induction equation; no physical magnetic forcing can compensate.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Long-wave instability of periodic shear flows with constant magnetic field for the 2D resistive MHD equations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/E5HPYOG2

@misc{pith2026260725836,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Long-wave instability of periodic shear flows with constant magnetic field for the 2D resistive MHD equations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/E5HPYOG2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.25836}
}
abstract

We investigate the long-wave linear stability and instability of the two-dimensional viscous, resistive Magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) equations, in vorticity-current formulation, on the periodic domain ${\mathbb T}_\alpha\times {\mathbb T} = \Big( {\mathbb R}/(\frac{2 \pi}{\alpha} {\mathbb Z}) \times {\mathbb R}/(2 \pi {\mathbb Z}) \Big)$, around a periodic shear flow $(U(y),0)$ coupled with a constant background magnetic field ${\bf b}=({\rm b}_1,{\rm b}_2)$. It is a non-trivial extension of a recent paper for the Navier-Stokes equations by Colombo, Dolce, Montalto & Ventura to the MHD setting in the spirit of the classical works of Kolmogorov, Meshalkin, Sinai and Yudovich. We establish explicit conditions on the shear flow profile $U(y)$ involving the viscosity $\nu$, the resistivity $\eta$ and the components of the background magnetic field ${\bf b}$ to obtain linear long-wave stability and instability in the regime $\alpha\ll 1$. The proof combines a non-perturbative normal form transformation decoupling the zero Fourier mode from the non-zero modes with sharp asymptotic expansions of the eigenvalues bifurcating from the zero unperturbed eigenvalue with respect to the parameter $\alpha$. As a dynamical consequence, we obtain a splitting of the phase space into unstable and stable subspaces, on which solutions grow or decay exponentially in Sobolev norm.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 5 linked inside Pith

  1. [15]

    arXiv preprint, arXiv:2509.18070, (2025)

    Colombo, M.; Dolce, M.; Montalto, R.; Ventura, P.:Long-wave instability of periodic shear flows for 2D Navier-Stokes equations. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2509.18070, (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  2. [1]

    Kolmogorov’s seminar on selected problems of analysis (1958/1959)

    Arnol’d, V .I.; Meshalkin, L.D.:A.N. Kolmogorov’s seminar on selected problems of analysis (1958/1959). Uspekhi Matematicheskikh Nauk15, 247–250, (1960)

    1958

  3. [2]

    Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2011

    Bahouri H.; Chemin Y-V; Danchin R.:Fourier Analysis and Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations.Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wis- senschaften, 343. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2011

    2011

  4. [3]

    Bardos, C.; Sulem, C.; Sulem, P.L.:Longtime dynamics of a conductive fluid in the presence of a strong magnetic field. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 305, 175–91, (1988)

    1988

  5. [4]

    Berti, M.; Corsi, L.; Maspero, A.; Ventura, P.:Infinitely many isolas of modulational instability for Stokes waves.arXiv preprint, arXiv:2405.05854, (2024)

    arXiv 2024

  6. [5]

    arXiv preprint, arXiv:2607.01939, (2026)

    Berti, M.; Maspero, A.; Radakovic, A.M.:McLean resonances and3dspectral instability of Stokes waves. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2607.01939, (2026)

    arXiv 2026

  7. [6]

    Math.230, 651–711, (2022)

    Berti, M.; Maspero, A.; Ventura, P.:Full description of Benjamin-Feir instability of Stokes waves in deep water.Invent. Math.230, 651–711, (2022)

    2022

  8. [7]

    Berti, M.; Maspero, A.; Ventura, P.:Benjamin-Feir instability of Stokes waves in finite depth.Arch. Rat. Mech. Anal.247, 91, (2023)

    2023

Show all 48 references
  1. [8]

    Berti, M.; Maspero, A.; Ventura, P.:Stokes waves at the critical depth are modulationally unstable.Comm. Math. Phys.405, 56, (2024)

    2024

  2. [9]

    Bian, D.; Grenier, E.:Asymptotic behaviour of solutions of linearized Navier Stokes equations in the long waves regime.arXiv preprint, arXiv:2312.16938, (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics44, 427–451, (2012)

    Boffetta, G.; Ecke, R.E.:Two-dimensional turbulence. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics44, 427–451, (2012)

    2012

  4. [11]

    Cai, Y .; Lei, Z.:Global Well-Posedness of the Incompressible Magnetohydrodynamics. Arch. Rat. Mech. Anal.228, 969–993 (2018)

    2018

  5. [12]

    Courier Corporation (2013)

    Chandrasekhar, S.:Hydrodynamic and hydromagnetic stability. Courier Corporation (2013)

    2013

  6. [13]

    Chen, T.; Zi, R.:On the Sobolev stability threshold for shear flows near Couette in 2D MHD equations.Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Section A Mathematics, 155(5), 1580–1630 (2025)

    2025

  7. [14]

    Ciampa, G,; Montalto, R.; Terracina, S.:Large amplitude traveling waves for the non-resistive MHD system. J. Hyperb. Diff. Eq. 21(3), 707–790, (2024)

    2024

  8. [16]

    Coti Zelati, M.; Sorella, M.; Villringer, D.:Alpha-unstable flows and the fast dynamo problem.arXiv preprint, arXiv:2504.00855, (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Coti Zelati, M.; Sorella, M.; Villringer, D.:A fast dynamo on the three-torusarXiv preprint, arXiv:2603.09861, (2026)

    2026 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Creedon, R.P.; Nguyen, H.Q.; Strauss, W.A.:Proof of the transverse instability of Stokes waves.Annals of PDE11(4), (2025)

    2025

  11. [19]

    Creedon, R.P.; Nguyen, H.Q.; Strauss, W.A.:Transverse instability of Stokes waves at finite depth.SIAM J. Math. Anal.58(1), 661–697, (2026)

    2026

  12. [20]

    A.:Introduction to Magnetohydrodynamics

    Davidson P. A.:Introduction to Magnetohydrodynamics. Cambridge Texts in Applied Mathematics (Cambridge University Press), (2016)

    2016

  13. [21]

    Dolce, M.:Stability Threshold of the 2D Couette Flow in a Homogeneous Magnetic Field Using Symmetric Variables. Comm. Math. Phys. 405(94), (2024)

    2024

  14. [22]

    SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis58, 1699–1743 (2026)

    Dolce, M.; Knobel, N.; Zillinger, C.:Large Norm Inflation of the Current in the Viscous, Nonresistive Magnetohydrodynamics Equations. SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis58, 1699–1743 (2026)

    2026

  15. [23]

    Cambridge University Press, 2004

    Drazin, P.G.; Reid, W.H.:Hydrodynamic stability. Cambridge University Press, 2004

    2004

  16. [24]

    Duraut, G.; Lions, J.-L.:Inéquations en thermoélasticitéet magnétohydrodynamique.Arch. Rat.. Mech. Anal.46, 241–279, (1972). 34

    1972

  17. [25]

    Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 949, A43 (2022)

    Fraser, A.E.; Cresswell, I.G.; Garaud, P.:Non-ideal instabilities in sinusoidal shear flows with a streamwise magnetic field. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 949, A43 (2022)

    2022

  18. [26]

    Duke Math

    Grenier, E.; Guo, Y .; Nguyen, T.T.:Spectral instability of characteristic boundary layer flows. Duke Math. J.165, 3085–3146, (2016)

    2016

  19. [27]

    Grenier, E.; Guo, Y .; Nguyen, T.T.: Spectral instability of general symmetric shear flows in a two-dimensional channel. Adv. Math.292, 52–110, (2016)

    2016

  20. [28]

    W.; Tobias, S

    Hughes, D. W.; Tobias, S. M.:On the instability of magnetohydrodynamic shear flows. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A457, 1365–1384 (2001)

    2001

  21. [29]

    Jiu, Q.; Niu, D.:Mathematical results related to a two-dimensional magneto-hydrodynamic equations.Acta Math. Sci. Ser. B Engl. Ed.26(4), 744–756, (2006)

    2006

  22. [30]

    Nonlinearity,38, 08501 (2025)

    Knobel, N.:Sobolev stability for the 2D MHD equations in the non-resistive limit. Nonlinearity,38, 08501 (2025)

    2025

  23. [31]

    J Nonlinear Sci 35, 54 (2025)

    Knobel, N.; Zillinger, C.:On the Sobolev Stability Threshold for the 2D MHD Equations with Horizontal Magnetic Dissipation. J Nonlinear Sci 35, 54 (2025)

    2025

  24. [32]

    J.41(3), 471–488, (1989)

    Kozono, H.:Weak and classical solutions of the two-dimensional magneto-hydrodynamic equations.Tohoku Math. J.41(3), 471–488, (1989)

    1989

  25. [33]

    Latushkin, Y .; Varudevan, S.:Eigenvalues of the linearized 2D Euler equations via Birman-Schwinger and Lin’s operators. J. Math. Fluid Mech. 20, 1667–1680, (2018)

    2018

  26. [34]

    Math., (2026)

    Liao, S.; Lin, Z.; Zhu, H.:On the stability and instability of Kelvin-Stuart cat’s eyes flows.Invent. Math., (2026). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00222- 026-01426-4

    2026 doi

  27. [35]

    Lin, Z.:Instability of some ideal plane flows.SIAM J. Math. Anal.53, 318–356, (2003)

    2003

  28. [36]

    Lin, Z.:Some stability and instability criteria for ideal plane flows.Comm. Math. Phys.246, 87–112, (2004)

    2004

  29. [37]

    Lin, F.; Xu, L.; Zhang, p.:Global small solutions of 2D incompressible MHD system. J. Diff. Eq.259(10), 5440–5485, (2015)

    2015

  30. [38]

    Lin, Z.; Zeng, C.:Instability, index theorem, and exponential trichotomy for linear Hamiltonian PDEs.Mem. Amer. Math. Soc.275, no. 1374, (2022)

    2022

  31. [39]

    Liss, K.:On the Sobolev Stability Threshold of 3D Couette Flow in a Uniform Magnetic Field. Commun. Math. Phys.377, 859–908 (2020)

    2020

  32. [40]

    The Astro- physical Journal, 712(2), 1116–1128 (2010)

    Lecoanet, D.; Zweibel, E.G.; Townsend, R.H.; Huang, Y .M.:Violation of Richardson’s criterion via introduction of a magnetic field. The Astro- physical Journal, 712(2), 1116–1128 (2010)

    2010

  33. [41]

    Meshalkin, L.D., Sinai, J.G.:Investigation of the stability of a stationary solution of a system of equations for the plane movement of an incom- pressible viscous liquid-J. Appl. Math. Mech.25, 1700–1705, (1961)

    1961

  34. [42]

    Pure Appl

    Nguyen, H.; Strauss., W.:Proof of modulational instability of Stokes waves in deep water.Comm. Pure Appl. Math.76(5), 899–1136, (2023)

    2023

  35. [43]

    Ren, X.; Wu, J.; Xiang, Z.; Zhang, Z.:Global existence and decay of smooth solution for the 2-D MHD equations without magnetic diffusion.J. Funct. Anal.267(2), 503–541, (2014)

    2014

  36. [44]

    Schmidt, P.G.:On a magnetohydrodynamic problem of Euler type. J. Diff. Eq.74(2), 318–335, (1988)

    1988

  37. [45]

    Secchi, P.:On the equations of ideal incompressible magnetohydrodynamics.Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova90, 103–119, (1993)

    1993

  38. [46]

    Sermange, M.; Temam, R.: Some mathematical questions related to the MHD equations. Comm. Pure Appl. Math.36(5), 635–664, (1983)

    1983

  39. [47]

    Tatsuno T.; Dorland, W.:Magneto-flow instability in symmetric field profiles. Phys. Plasmas 1 September,13(9): 092107 (2006)

    2006

  40. [48]

    Yudovich, V .I.:Instability of parallel flows of a viscous incompressible fluid with respect to perturbations periodic in space. Z. Vyˇcisl. Mat i Mat. Fiz.6, 242–249, (1966). 35

    1966

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.