Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 42 references

The primitive equations on curved surfaces

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 On any smooth closed surface in space, the primitive equations have unique global smooth solutions for all initial velocities, without any smallness condition.

desk verdict Global smooth well-posedness for primitive equations on general closed surfaces is a real step beyond Drutsa and Korn, but the proof as written has an endpoint gap in the continuation argument that is repairable. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.27724 v1 pith:2CSZJ5NU submitted 2026-07-30 math.AP

M. Hieber , Y. Shao , G. Simonett , M. Wilke This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35Q3535Q8676D0376D0586A10
keywords primitiveequationsglobalwell-posednesshydrostaticStokesoperatorHelmholtzprojectionboundedH∞-calculusmaximalL_q-regularitycurvedsurfacescriticalBesovspaces
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

This paper proves that the primitive equations of geophysical fluid dynamics—the model behind weather and climate simulation—are globally well-posed on a collar neighborhood of any smooth closed hypersurface in three-dimensional space, such as a sphere. The main result says that for every initial horizontal velocity in the critical Besov space $B^{2/q}_{qp,\sigma}$ vanishing on the bottom boundary, there is a unique solution that exists for all time and becomes $C^\infty$ smooth in time and space, with no smallness assumption on the data. Previous global well-posedness results were largely confined to flat Euclidean settings or to more regular initial data; here the curved geometry is built into the hydrostatic Stokes operator, including the Ricci curvature term. A sympathetic reader would take the paper as establishing that large-data global regularity is a genuine feature of the primitive equations on curved surfaces, not an artifact of flat coordinates.

What carries the argument

The central object is the hydrostatic Helmholtz projection $P_h v = P_H v + \bar{v}$, where $P_H$ is the classical Helmholtz projection on $\Sigma$ and $\bar{v}$ is the vertical average of $v$. This projection removes the surface pressure and encodes the constraint $\mathrm{div}_{\Sigma} v = 0$. The associated hydrostatic Stokes operator $A = -P_h(\Delta_N + \mathrm{Ric})$ on $L^q_{\sigma}(N;T\Sigma)$, with boundary conditions $v=0$ on the bottom and $\partial_r v=0$ on the top, is shown to have a bounded $H^\infty$-calculus (Theorem 3.3); this bounded calculus is the mechanism that yields maximal regularity, local well-posedness, and the smooth semiflow. The Ricci term appears naturally from the connection Laplacian on the product manifold and encodes the curvature of th

What would settle it

Run a high-resolution simulation of (1.1) on a sphere with a large, divergence-free initial horizontal velocity field concentrated near the bottom boundary; a finite-time blow-up of the $H^2$ norm of $v$ would directly contradict Theorem 1.1. A cheaper check is to verify numerically whether the $B_1(\|v_0\|_{H^2},T)$ bound from Theorem 5.3 remains finite for a sequence of initial data with growing $H^2$ norm—an infinite value for a finite $T$ would also refute the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the hydrostatic Helmholtz projection $P_h v = P_H v + \bar{v}$ splits off the surface pressure and enforces the hydrostatic divergence constraint, reducing the primitive equations to the quasilinear evolution $\partial_t v + A v = F(v)$, where $A = -P_h(\Delta_N + \mathrm{Ric})$ is the hydrostatic Stokes operator on the product manifold $N = \Sigma \times (-h,0)$. The paper proves that $A$ admits a bounded $H^\infty$-calculus on $L^q_{\sigma}(N;T\Sigma)$, which supplies maximal $L_q$-regularity and local well-posedness for critical initial data. A long chain of a priori estimates, carried out at $p=q=2$, controls the $H^2$ norm of solutions in terms of the initial $H^2$ norm and time; combined with the smoothing property of the semiflow

Load-bearing premise

The proof's a priori estimate (Theorem 5.3) is carried out only for $p=q=2$ with $H^2$ initial data that are smooth at $t=0$; the transfer to the full critical Besov range rests on the compactness/blow-up criterion Proposition 4.5(e), which is the load-bearing premise that would collapse if the smoothing or compact embedding failed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Theorem 1.1 yields unique global smooth solutions for every initial datum in B^{2/q}_{qp,σ}(N;TΣ) with bottom Dirichlet boundary condition, for any smooth closed hypersurface Σ⊂R^3, without any smallness assumption.
  • Choosing q large, the theorem covers initial data of arbitrarily low Sobolev smoothness in the critical scaling-invariant class, so global well-posedness is not restricted to H^1_2 data.
  • Each solution regularizes instantaneously: v∈C∞((0,∞)×N;TΣ) and grad_Σ π_s ∈C∞((0,∞)×Σ;TΣ), and the solution map is smooth in the initial data.
  • The bounded H∞-calculus for the hydrostatic Stokes operator is a stand-alone result for parabolic problems on thin manifolds with mixed boundary conditions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Not in the paper: because the a priori estimates are stable under lower-order perturbations, the same hydrostatic-Stokes framework should extend to primitive equations with Coriolis forces, temperature, salinity, or free-surface variants on curved surfaces.
  • Not in the paper: the formal h=0 limit matching the surface Navier–Stokes equations raises the question whether solutions of the curved primitive equations converge to surface Navier–Stokes solutions as the layer thickness shrinks; the paper notes the connection but does not prove the limit.
  • Not in the paper: the Ricci-curvature term suggests a testable refinement—whether the H^2 a priori bounds hold uniformly as the Gaussian curvature of Σ grows, a statement subtly stronger than the present theorem.
  • Not in the paper: a numerical check on a sphere and a torus with the same aspect ratio could probe whether the blow-up criterion in Proposition 4.5(e) is sensitive to curvature or only to the size of the data.
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 primitive equations in a collar neighborhood N = Σ × [−h, 0] of a smooth closed hypersurface Σ ⊂ R^3. It introduces a hydrostatic Helmholtz projection and a hydrostatic Stokes operator A = −P_h(Δ_N + Ric), proves that λ + A admits a bounded H^∞-calculus, and uses this to obtain local well-posedness for initial data in the critical Besov spaces B^{2/q}_{qp,σ}(N;TΣ) with 1/p + 1/q ≤ 1. It then derives a priori estimates in the L^2/H^2 setting (p = q = 2) and claims global existence of unique smooth solutions without smallness assumptions, together with C^∞ regularity for t > 0. An appendix gives an informal derivation of the model from the Navier–Stokes equations in a thin collar of Σ.

Significance. If the global result is correct, this is a substantial extension of the Euclidean/channel primitive-equation theory to curved closed surfaces, and it claims global smooth well-posedness in critical spaces without smallness. The functional-analytic core — hydrostatic projection, interpolation characterization, bounded H^∞-calculus, and maximal-regularity framework — is standard and presented in considerable detail. The paper also gives explicit estimates and a pressure reconstruction argument, which are valuable. The main caveats are in the last step: the continuation criterion is not proved at the endpoint 1/p + 1/q = 1, and the a priori estimates rely on an unproved smoothness-to-t = 0 assumption. Both issues appear repairable but are load-bearing for the central theorem.

major comments (2)
  1. [§5.2, Theorem 5.4 / Proposition 4.5(e)] The endpoint case is not covered by the continuation argument. After obtaining v ∈ BC([δ,T+);H^2_2(N;TΣ)), the proof sets μ̃ = 1/p + 1/q + η/2 and applies Proposition 4.5(e) with μ_c = 1/p + 1/q. However, Proposition 4.5(e) requires μ ∈ (μ_c, 1]. When 1/p + 1/q = 1 — in particular for p = q = 2, which is exactly Corollary 1.2 — the interval (μ_c, 1] is empty, so the criterion is vacuous. The compactness idea behind the proof of (e) could likely be adapted using the compact embedding H^2_2(N;TΣ) ↪ B^{2/q}_{qp,σ}(N;TΣ) in the endpoint case, but that argument is not supplied. As written, the proof of Theorem 5.4 and hence of Theorem 1.1 has a gap at the equality case.
  2. [§5.1, paragraph before Theorem 5.3 and Step 6] The assertion that, after a time shift, v and π_s may be assumed as smooth as desired on [0,T] including t = 0 is not justified. Proposition 4.5(d) yields C^∞ only for t > 0. The proof of Theorem 5.3 uses derivatives at t = 0, for instance in Step 6 inequality (5.14), where ∥v_t(0)∥_{L^2(N)} is estimated; this requires a second-order compatibility condition that is not guaranteed by v_0 ∈ H^2_{2,σ}(N;TΣ) with v_0 = 0 on Σ_b and ∂_r v_0 = 0 on Σ_u. If this is intended as a regularization argument, the limiting procedure is missing; if it is intended as a time-shift, the resulting bound is not in terms of the original ∥v_0∥_{H^2_2}. The a priori estimate therefore needs an additional justification or a reformulation that avoids evaluating derivatives at the initial time.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§5.2, proof of Theorem 5.4] The line 'X_{μ̃−1/p,p} ⊂ B^{2/q+η}_{qp}(N;TΣ)' has the inclusion in the wrong direction for the stated application: one needs v ∈ BC([δ,T+);X_{μ̃−1/p,p}), not merely boundedness in a larger space. The conclusion is probably recoverable from Proposition 4.1, which gives equality (with the solenoidal condition), but the text should state this correctly.
  2. [§4, Proposition 4.1] The proof says 'By using Proposition 4.1 and Proposition 2.2 ...' but Proposition 4.1 is the statement being proved; it should refer to the corresponding results in [40, Propositions C.3 and C.4] or another external source.
  3. [§5.1, Lemma 5.1] The coefficient '20∂_t' in the statement and the later combination leading to the coefficient 10 are not explained; this appears to be a compressed calculation rather than an error, but a short comment would improve readability.
  4. [Appendix B] The model derivation is informal. In particular, the terms in (B.20) are said to 'can be neglected' based on order-of-magnitude estimates, and the statement 'More details will be given somewhere else' leaves the C^3-close-to-sphere approximation unproved. Since Theorem 1.1 is proved for the system (1.1) as a PDE, this does not invalidate the main theorem, but the claimed physical justification in the introduction is weaker than the surrounding text suggests.
  5. [Proposition 4.5(e)] There is a notational clash: the exponent in X_{µ−1/p,p} is written with µ and μ almost interchangeably. This should be cleaned up, especially since the strict inequality μ ∈ (μ_c,1] is central to the endpoint gap.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the derivation is self-contained and the endpoint concern is a correctness gap, not a circularity.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The hydrostatic Helmholtz projection is explicitly defined and verified in Section 2 (Props. 2.1 and 2.2), and the hydrostatic Stokes operator is then built from it in Section 3. The H-infinity calculus for a simplified operator is proved in Proposition 3.1 by combining a proof for the vertical operator with a citation of [40] only for the connection Laplacian on the closed surface; [40] concerns Navier-Stokes on manifolds with boundary, not the primitive equations or the present global-existence claim, so it is independent support rather than a self-referential premise. The local well-posedness (Prop. 4.5) and the global a priori estimates (Theorems 5.3 and 5.4) are established by contraction arguments and energy estimates directly in the paper; the passage from smooth data to critical Besov data uses the already-proved regularization properties and blow-up criterion. There is no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction and no theorem whose statement is identical to an input assumption. The manuscript's reliance on prior work by some of the same authors is real but not circular under the standards above. The skeptical concern regarding the endpoint 1/p+1/q = 1 in Theorem 5.4 is a genuine proof gap: Proposition 4.5(e) is vacuous when the required weight exceeds 1. However, this is an issue of correctness/completeness, not a circular identification of the conclusion with an input, and therefore does not affect the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The paper introduces no free parameters fitted to data; the model itself is an approximation with small parameters h/radius and a closeness assumption. The main load-bearing inputs are the analytic machinery (H∞-calculus, maximal regularity) and the geometric approximation in Appendix B. The geometric terms 'neglected' in the derivation are the most ad hoc part, but they are not fitted values; they are approximations that are claimed to be justified by small aspect ratio.

free parameters (2)
  • ε = ε ≈ 1/a
    In Appendix B, the surface Σ is assumed C^3-close to a sphere of radius a with ρ controlled by ε≈1/a, which is used to justify neglecting curvature-scale terms. This is an approximation parameter, not fitted to data.
  • layer thickness h = h > 0, arbitrarily small
    The entire model is derived in a thin collar of thickness h, with many terms neglected because h is small. h is not fitted but is a modeling input. The equations (1.1) are not the exact Navier-Stokes in the collar, but an approximation.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The hydrostatic Stokes operator A admits a bounded H∞-calculus with angle < π/2 on L_{q,σ}(N;TΣ) (Theorem 3.3).
    This is the central analytic input; its proof in Section 3 relies on the H∞-calculus for the connection Laplacian on closed manifolds from prior work [40] and on a perturbation argument. It is not an ad hoc assumption but a theorem; still, the whole result rests on it.
  • standard math All geometric estimates (Ricci identities, Bochner-type formulas, Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequalities with boundary) hold on the product manifold N=Σ×[−h,0].
    The appendix collects these. They are standard results from differential geometry and Sobolev theory, mostly referenced to [3], [39], [40].
  • ad hoc to paper The derivation of (1.1) from Navier-Stokes in Appendix B is legitimate: the neglected terms (2wL_Σ v, (2L_Σ+H_Σ)∂_r v, w div_Σ L^♯_Σ, 2L_Σ grad_Σ w) are indeed negligible.
    This is the weakest modeling input. Equations (B.20), (B.22) justify dropping these terms using small h and closeness to a sphere, but the estimates are only sketched and one is deferred to a future publication. If these terms are not negligible, (1.1) is not the correct model for the curved thin layer.
invented entities (2)
  • Hydrostatic Helmholtz projection P_h independent evidence
    purpose: Projection onto hydrostatic solenoidal fields, eliminating the surface pressure from the evolution.
    Not a physical entity but a mathematical operator. Its independent evidence is that it is explicitly defined in (2.2), and its properties are proved; it is a standard tool in the flat case [20].
  • Ricci term in the Stokes operator (∆_N + Ric)v independent evidence
    purpose: Captures curvature effects of the surface in the diffusion operator.
    The Ricci tensor is a standard geometric object; whether it should appear with this sign and coefficient is a modeling claim from the derivation, but the operator itself is explicit and well-defined.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The primitive equations on curved surfaces." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2CSZJ5NU

@misc{pith2026260727724,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The primitive equations on curved surfaces},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2CSZJ5NU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.27724}
}
abstract

In this paper, we study the primitive equations in a collar neighborhood of a smooth closed hypersurface in ${\mathbb R}^3$. Using the framework of maximal $L_q$-regularity and the hydrostatic Helmholtz projection, we establish existence, uniqueness, and regularity results for strong solutions. Building on these local well-posedness results, we derive suitable a priori estimates and prove the global existence of strong solutions without imposing any smallness assumptions for the initial data. Moreover, we show that the solutions are $C^\infty$ jointly in time and space.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references

  1. [1]

    R. A. Adams, J.J.F. Fournier.Sobolev Spaces. 2nd ed. Academic Press, 2003

    2003

  2. [2]

    Amann,Linear and Quasilinear Parabolic Problems

    H. Amann,Linear and Quasilinear Parabolic Problems. Vol. I. Abstract Linear Theory.Monogr. Math.89, Birkh¨ auser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 1995

    1995

  3. [3]

    Amann,Function spaces on singular manifolds.Math

    H. Amann,Function spaces on singular manifolds.Math. Nachr.286, no. 5-6, 436-475 (2013)

    2013

  4. [4]

    Amann,Parabolic equations on uniformly regular Riemannian manifolds and degenerate initial boundary value problems.Recent developments of mathematical fluid mechanics, 43-77

    H. Amann,Parabolic equations on uniformly regular Riemannian manifolds and degenerate initial boundary value problems.Recent developments of mathematical fluid mechanics, 43-77. Adv. Math. Fluid Mech. Birkh¨ auser/Springer, Basel, 2016

    2016

  5. [5]

    Amann,Linear and Quasilinear Parabolic Problems

    H. Amann,Linear and Quasilinear Parabolic Problems. Vol. II. Function Spaces.Monogr. Math.106, Birkh¨ auser/Springer, Cham, 2019

    2019

  6. [6]

    Aubin,Nonlinear Analysis on Manifolds

    T. Aubin,Nonlinear Analysis on Manifolds. Monge-Amp´ ere Equations.Grundlehren Math. Wiss.252[Fun- damental Principles of Mathematical Sciences] Springer-Verlag, New York, 1982

    1982

  7. [7]

    C. Cao, E. S. Titi,Global well-posedness of the three-dimensional viscous primitive equations of large scale ocean and atmosphere dynamics.Ann. of Math. (2)166, no. 1, 245–267 (2007)

    2007

  8. [8]

    R. Denk, M. Hieber and J. Pr¨ uss,R-boundedness, Fourier multipliers and problems of elliptic and parabolic type.Mem. Amer. Math. Soc.166, no. 788, 2003

    2003

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Drutsa,Existence in the large of a solution to primitive equations in a domain with unveven bottom

    A. Drutsa,Existence in the large of a solution to primitive equations in a domain with unveven bottom. Russian J. Num. Anal. Math. Model.24, no. 6, p515 (2009)

    2009

  2. [10]

    Drutsa,Existence in the large of a solution of equations of large-scale ocean dynamics on a manifold

    A. Drutsa,Existence in the large of a solution of equations of large-scale ocean dynamics on a manifold. Sbornik Math.202, no. 10, 1463 (2011)

    2011

  3. [11]

    H. Du, Y. Shao and G. Simonett,On a thermodynamically consistent model for magnetoviscoelastic fluids in 3D.J. Evol. Equ.24, no. 1, Paper No. 9, 51 pp (2024). THE PRIMITIVE EQUATIONS ON CUR VED SURF ACES 51

    2024

  4. [12]

    Furukawa, Y

    K. Furukawa, Y. Giga, M. Gries, M. Hieber, A. Hussein and T. Kashiwabara.Rigorous justification of the hydrostatic approximation for the primitive equations by scaled Navier-Stokes equations.Nonlinearity.33, no. 12, (2020)

    2020

  5. [13]

    Furukawa, Y

    K. Furukawa, Y. Giga, M. Gries, M. Hieber, A. Hussein and T. Kashiwabara.The three limits of the hydrostatic approximation.J. London Math. Soc.111, no. 2, e70130, (2025)

    2025

  6. [14]

    Galdi, M

    G.P. Galdi, M. Hieber and T. Kashiwabara,Strong time-periodic solutions to the 3D primitive equations subject to arbitrary large forces.Nonlinearity30, no. 10, 3979-3992 (2017)

    2017

  7. [15]

    Y. Giga, M. Gries, M. Hieber, A. Hussein and T. Kashiwabara.BoundedH ∞-calculus for the hydrostatic Stokes operator onL p-spaces and applications.Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.145(9), 3865-3876 (2017)

    2017

  8. [16]

    Y. Giga, M. Gries, M. Hieber, A. Hussein and T. Kashiwabara.Analyticity of solutions to the primitive equations.Math. Nachr.293, no. 2, 284-304 (2020)

    2020

  9. [17]

    Y. Giga, M. Gries, M. Hieber, A. Hussein and T. Kashiwabara.The hydrostatic Stokes semigroup and well-posedness of the primitive equations on spaces of bounded functions.J. Func. Anal.279, no. 3, 108561 (2020)

    2020

  10. [18]

    Y. Giga, M. Gries, M. Hieber, A. Hussein and T. Kashiwabara.The primitive equations in the scaling invariant spaceL ∞(L1).J. Evol. Equ.21, no. 4, 4145-4169 (2021)

    2021

  11. [19]

    Hieber, A

    M. Hieber, A. Hussein and T. Kashiwabara,Global strongL p well-posedness of the 3D primitive equations with heat and salinity diffusion.J. Differential Equations261, no. 12, 6950-6981 (2016)

    2016

  12. [20]

    Hieber, T

    M. Hieber, T. Kashiwabara,Global strong well-posedness of the three dimensional primitive equations in Lp-spaces.Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal.221, no. 3, 1077-1115 (2016)

    2016

  13. [21]

    Hyt¨ onen, J

    T. Hyt¨ onen, J. v. Neerven, M. Veraar and L. Weis,Analysis in Banach Spaces. Vol. II. Probabilistic Methods and Operator Theory.Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas. 3rd Series. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics]67, Springe...

    2017

  14. [22]

    in the large

    G. M. Kobelkov,Existence of a solution “in the large” for ocean dynamics equations.J. Math. Fluid Mech. 9, 588–610 (2007)

    2007

  15. [23]

    Korn,Global well-posedness of the viscous primitive equations with a free surface.Personal communica- tion (2026)

    P. Korn,Global well-posedness of the viscous primitive equations with a free surface.Personal communica- tion (2026)

    2026

  16. [24]

    Kukavica, M

    I. Kukavica, M. Ziane,On the regularity of the primitive equations of the ocean.Nonlinearity20, 2739–2753 (2007)

    2007

  17. [25]

    J. Li, E. S. Titi,Recent advances concerning certain class of geophysical flows.In: Handbook of Math. Anal. Mech. Viscous Fluids (eds.: Y. Giga, A. Novotny) Vol. 1, 933-971, Springer (2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    J. Li, E. S. Titi,The primitive equations as the small aspect ratio limit of the Navier–Stokes equations: rigorous justification of the hydrostatic approximation.J. Math. Pures Appl.124, 30–58 (2019)

    2019

  19. [27]

    Lions, R

    J.-L. Lions, R. Temam and S. Wang,New formulations of the primitive equations of atmosphere and applications.Nonlinearity5, no. 2, 237–288 (1992)

    1992

  20. [28]

    Lions, R

    J.-L. Lions, R. Temam and S. Wang,On the equations of the large-scale ocean.Nonlinearity5, no. 5, 1007-1053 (1992)

    1992

  21. [29]

    Lions, R

    J.-L. Lions, R. Temam and S. Wang,Mathematical theory for the coupled atmosphere–ocean models (CAO III), J. Math. Pures Appl.74, 05–163 (1995)

    1995

  22. [30]

    Meyries, R

    M. Meyries, R. Schnaubelt,Interpolation, embeddings and traces of anisotropic ractional Sobolev spaces with temporal weights. J. Funct. Anal.262, 1200-1229 (2012)

    2012

  23. [31]

    Meyries, M

    M. Meyries, M. Veraar,Sharp embedding results for spaces of smooth functions with power weights. Studia Math.208, 257-293 (2012)

    2012

  24. [32]

    M¨ uller,The Equations of Oceanic Motions

    P. M¨ uller,The Equations of Oceanic Motions. Cambridge Univ. Press, 291pp, (2006)

    2006

  25. [33]

    Pedlovsky,Geophysical Fluid Dynamics.Second edition

    J. Pedlovsky,Geophysical Fluid Dynamics.Second edition. Springer, New York, 1987

    1987

  26. [34]

    Petersen,Riemannian Geometry.Second edition

    P. Petersen,Riemannian Geometry.Second edition. Graduate Texts in Mathematics171, Springer, New York, 2006

    2006

  27. [35]

    Pr¨ uss, G

    J. Pr¨ uss, G. Simonett,Moving Interfaces and Quasilinear Parabolic Evolution Equations.Monographs in Mathematics. Birkh¨ auser Verlag. 2016

    2016

  28. [36]

    On quasilinear parabolic evolution equations in weighted Lp-spaces II

    J. Pr¨ uss, M. Wilke,Addendum to the paper “On quasilinear parabolic evolution equations in weighted Lp-spaces II”. J. Evol. Equ.17, no. 4, 1381-1388 (2017)

    2017

  29. [37]

    Pr¨ uss, G

    J. Pr¨ uss, G. Simonett and M. Wilke,Critical spaces for quasilinear parabolic evolution equations and applications. J. Differential Equations264, no. 3, 2028-2074 (2018)

  30. [38]

    Pr¨ uss, G

    J. Pr¨ uss, G. Simonett and M. Wilke,On the Navier-Stokes equations on surfaces. J. Evol. Equ.21, no. 3, 3153-3179 (2021). 52 M. HIEBER, Y. SHAO, G. SIMONETT, AND M. WILKE

    2021

  31. [39]

    Samavaki, J

    M. Samavaki, J. Tuomela,Navier-Stokes equations on Riemannian manifolds. J. Geom. Phys.148103543, 15 pp. (2020)

    2020

  32. [40]

    Y. Shao, G. Simonett and M. Wilke,The Navier-Stokes equations on manifolds with boundary.J. Differ- ential Equations416, 1602-1659 (2025)

    2025

  33. [41]

    Simonett, M

    G. Simonett, M. Wilke,H ∞-calculus for the surface Stokes operator and applications. J. Math. Fluid Mech. 24, no. 4, Paper No. 109, 23 pp. (2022)

    2022

  34. [42]

    Triebel,Interpolation Theory, Function Spaces, Differential Operators.North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam-New York, 1978

    H. Triebel,Interpolation Theory, Function Spaces, Differential Operators.North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam-New York, 1978. Department of Mathematics, TU Darmstadt, Schlossgartenstr. 7, 64289 Darmstadt, Germany Email address:hieber@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de The Universit...

    1978

Pith tools

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