Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 46 references

Global well-posedness of magnetohydrodynamic equations

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that the incompressible MHD system with a time-dependent Dirichlet boundary condition on the magnetic field admits global weak solutions in two and three dimensions, unique in two dimensions, and, with stronger data, a…

desk verdict Genuinely new weak-solution theory for MHD with time-dependent boundary data, but the strong-solution claim and the continuous-dependence estimate are not proved as written. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.02636 v2 pith:AH3HNC26 submitted 2019-08-07 math.AP

Chengfei Ai , Zhong Tan , Jianfeng Zhou This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35Q3535B6576W0576N10
keywords magnetohydrodynamicequationsglobalweaksolutionsstrongtime-dependentDirichletboundaryconditionliftingfunctionssemi-Galerkinmethoduniformattractorwell-posedness
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 claims global well-posedness for the incompressible magnetohydrodynamic equations when the magnetic field obeys a time-dependent Dirichlet boundary condition, a setting in which the usual dissipative energy law does not hold. For initial and boundary data at the regularity of Theorem 1.1, it proves the global existence of weak solutions in two and three dimensions, uniqueness and continuous dependence in two dimensions, and, under stronger data, a unique global strong solution in two dimensions. The same framework yields a compact uniform attractor for the two-dimensional system. The result matters because it converts a non-autonomous boundary-value problem into a controlled energy-estimate problem, giving a fairly complete well-posedness and long-time-behavior picture in 2D.

What carries the argument

The two lifting functions $h_E$ and $h_p$ are the load-bearing objects. $h_E$ is the unique solution of $-\Delta h_E=0$ with $h_E=h$ on $\Gamma$, so subtracting it transfers the nonhomogeneous boundary condition to a homogeneous one while injecting boundary regularity into the interior; $h_p$ solves $\partial_t h_p-\Delta h_p=0$ with initial data $b_0$ and boundary data $h$, used for strong solutions. Their regularity (Lemmas 2.2 and 2.3) supplies the integrability that makes the Gronwall argument close. The approximation scheme is semi-Galerkin: only the velocity is projected onto eigenfunctions of the Stokes operator, while the magnetic equation is solved as a nonlinear parabolic PDE for each projected velocity, with local existence by a Schauder fixed-point argument and global extension by the uniform energy bounds.

What would settle it

Directly test the key energy estimate: choose a smooth bounded domain and boundary data $h$ at the threshold of (1.6), compute $\|h_E\|_{L^{q_n}(0,T;H^1)}$ and $\|\partial_t h_E\|_{L^2(L^2)}$ numerically, and compare with Lemma 2.2. If the estimate fails for any such $h$, or if a 2D solution with data in (1.6) develops a singularity before time $T$, the global existence claim is false. Conversely, if the lifting bounds saturate exactly and the energy inequality (3.22) still closes, the proof's mechanism is confirmed.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the time-dependent boundary term $b=h$ on $\Gamma$ can be removed by lifting: write $b=\tilde b+h_E$, where $h_E$ is the harmonic extension of $h$, or $b=\hat b+h_p$, where $h_p$ solves a linear heat equation with boundary value $h$. After this change, the system has homogeneous boundary conditions and the energy estimate takes the form $\frac{d}{dt}(\|u\|^2+\|\tilde b\|^2)+\|\nabla u\|^2+\|\nabla\tilde b\|^2$ bounded by terms involving only boundary data and the same norms. Lemmas 2.2 and 2.3 give the needed regularity of the liftings, and Gronwall's inequality then yields the uniform bounds (3.23)-(3.24). Theorem 1.1 follows by a semi-Galerkin approximation and compactness; Theorem 3.1 gives uniqueness and continuous dependence in 2D; Theorem 1.2 gives a strong solution in 2D; Theorem 1.3 gives the uniform attractor.

Load-bearing premise

The proof rests on the lifting lemmas: the boundary datum $h$ must be regular enough that the harmonic extension $h_E$ has $\|h_E\|_{L^{q_n}(0,T;H^1)}$ finite and $\partial_t h_E\in L^2(L^2)$, and the parabolic extension $h_p$ has the corresponding $H^1/H^2$ bounds. If the boundary regularity (1.6) or (1.7) is weakened, these integrability estimates fail and the Gronwall argument in (3.22)-(3.24) no longer closes; the global existence, uniqueness, and attractor results would collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In two dimensions, the initial-boundary value problem (1.2)-(1.5) is globally well-posed: a unique weak solution exists for every $T>0$ and depends continuously on $(u_0,b_0,h)$.
  • With higher regularity $(u_0,b_0)\in V\times H^1$ and $h\in L^2(0,T;H^{3/2}(\Gamma))$, $\partial_t h\in L^2(0,T;H^{-1/2}(\Gamma))$, the 2D solution is a strong solution with $(u,b)\in L^\infty(V\times H^1)\cap L^2(H^2\times H^2)$.
  • The associated process has a compact uniform attractor in $V\times H^1$, equal to the union over boundary symbols $h\in\Sigma_1$ of the kernel sections $K_h(0)$; this describes the long-time behavior of the non-autonomous system.
  • In three dimensions, global weak solutions exist for large data of the stated regularity, though uniqueness and strong solutions are not obtained.
  • The energy inequality (3.22) provides uniform-in-time bounds independent of the Galerkin dimension $m$, which powers both the compactness argument and the construction of absorbing sets.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The harmonic/parabolic lifting trick should transfer to other dissipative systems with time-dependent Dirichlet data, such as Boussinesq or liquid-crystal models; the only prerequisite is an elliptic or parabolic lifting lemma with matching regularity.
  • The 3D result is existence-only; since no regularity criterion is proved, the paper leaves open whether 3D weak solutions with this boundary condition are unique or become strong. A natural next step is to seek a Serrin-type condition involving the boundary datum $h$.
  • The attractor theorem assumes smallness of $\sup_t\|h\|_{H^{1/2}(\Gamma)}$ and normality of the symbol space. If that smallness is essential, the long-time behavior for large-amplitude time-dependent boundary fields may differ, for example by lacking a bounded absorbing set, which could be tested by direct simulation.
  • The exponents $q_n=4$ in 2D and $q_n=8$ in 3D come from Sobolev interpolation in the nonlinear terms; one could try to lower them, which would widen the admissible class of boundary data.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies the incompressible MHD system (1.1) in a smooth bounded domain Ω⊂R^n, n=2,3, with no-slip velocity boundary condition and time-dependent Dirichlet boundary data h for the magnetic field. It introduces elliptic and parabolic lifting functions for h and proves three main results: Theorem 1.1 gives global weak solutions with (u,b)∈L∞(H×L^2)∩L^2(V×H^1) under h∈L^{q_n}(H^{1/2}), ∂_t h∈L^2(H^{-1/2}), plus uniqueness for n=2; Theorem 1.2 gives global strong solutions in 2D with (u,b)∈L∞(V×H^1)∩L^2(H^2×H^2) under higher boundary regularity; Theorem 1.3 constructs a uniform attractor in V×H^1 for the solution process. The proofs use a semi-Galerkin approximation for the velocity, fixed-point arguments for the magnetic field, energy estimates with lifting functions, and a uniform-attractor criterion of Chepyzhov–Vishik type.

Significance. If the three theorems were fully proved, the paper would provide a complete well-posedness and long-time-behavior theory for a natural MHD model with nonautonomous magnetic boundary conditions, extending the classical Leray–Hopf theory to the MHD setting with nonhomogeneous Dirichlet data. The lifting construction is standard and the energy estimates for the weak solution existence are detailed and plausible; the weak-solution existence part (n=2,3) appears largely supported by the Galerkin–compactness argument. However, as written, the uniqueness proof for 2D weak solutions and the strong-solution proof contain gaps that are load-bearing, so the significance can only be assessed after those gaps are repaired.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.1, Theorem 3.1] The uniqueness/continuous-dependence proof for 2D weak solutions is not justified. The difference pair (\bar u,\bar b) satisfies (3.29) with \bar b|_Γ = \bar h, which is generally nonzero; nevertheless the proof multiplies the \bar b-equation by \bar b. Since \bar b is not an admissible zero-trace test function in the weak formulation, this multiplication is not permitted. The resulting boundary integral K3 = ∫_Γ ∂_ν \bar b · \bar h ds is then bounded by ‖∂_ν \bar b‖_{H^{-1/2}(Γ)}‖\bar h‖_{H^{1/2}(Γ)}, but a function in the weak-solution class L^∞(L^2)∩L^2(H^1) does not have a normal-derivative trace in H^{-1/2}(Γ). Thus (3.28) is not established, and the uniqueness claim in Theorem 1.1 for n=2 currently lacks proof. The standard repair is to subtract a parabolic (or harmonic) lift of \bar h and test with the resulting zero-trace function; this repair does not appear in the manuscript.
  2. [§3.2, proof of Theorem 1.2] The proof of the global strong solution is circular at its first step. Equation (1.5) is multiplied by S u = -Δu + ∇p and by -Δ\hat b, and the estimate (3.30) is derived. These operations require u and \hat b to have H^2 spatial regularity and the equations to hold a.e., which is precisely the regularity (1.8) that the theorem aims to prove. The only solution available at that point is the weak solution from Theorem 1.1, with regularity L^∞(H×L^2)∩L^2(V×H^1). No Galerkin approximation or other regularization is used to justify the strong-form multipliers, and no limiting argument is supplied to pass from approximate solutions to (1.8). Since (1.8)-(1.9) are also used in Theorem 3.2 and in Section 4, this gap undermines those results as well.
  3. [§4.2, Step 1] The proof of ω-limit compactness for the process is incomplete. The derivation of (4.9)-(4.11) again multiplies by -S u_2 and -Δb_2, which presupposes the H^2 regularity that is not available because Theorem 1.2 is not established (see previous comment). Moreover, after (4.11) the text concludes that by choosing n and m large, all terms on the right-hand side become arbitrarily small. The final term ∫_{t_0}^{t} e^{-γ(t-s)}‖h(s)‖^2_{H^{3/2}(Γ)} ds carries no small spectral coefficient, and the uniform-in-h smallness of this tail is not shown; the normality condition in (A2) could provide it, but the argument is not given. The claim of ω-limit compactness therefore rests on missing justifications.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'reduced from' should be 'reduced form'.
  2. [Section 1, literature review] The sentence 'For more details, one can refer to ... the reference therein' should read 'references therein'.
  3. [Equation (1.9)] The second component is written as ∂_t d; it should be ∂_t b.
  4. [Theorem 3.2, proof] The expression '12 d/dt' should be '(1/2) d/dt'.
  5. [Section 4.1, Lemma 4.2 paragraph] The phrase 'we need to obtain some absorbing sets ... uniform abstractor' should read 'uniform attractor'.
  6. [Equations (3.9)-(3.18)] The notation 'cM qt' is ambiguous; the intended expression appears to be c M^q t, and this should be clarified.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the existence, uniqueness, and attractor proofs are derived from first-principles estimates and standard external lemmas; self-citations are contextual and non-load-bearing.

full rationale

I found no step in the paper where a claimed result is equivalent to its own input by construction. The main theorems are proved directly: Theorem 1.1 uses the semi-Galerkin approximation, energy estimates (3.22)-(3.24), and Aubin-Lions compactness; Theorem 1.2 uses higher-order estimates (3.30); Theorem 1.3 uses the external uniform-attractor criterion [31]. The lifting functions h_E and h_p are auxiliary objects constructed from the given boundary and initial data in Lemmas 2.2-2.3, with regularity quoted from standard elliptic and parabolic theory (Lions-Magenes, Taylor), not from the authors' prior results. The boundary regularity assumptions (1.6)-(1.7) are hypotheses, not consequences of the conclusions. There are no fitted parameters and no quantity is defined in terms of the target prediction. The authors' self-citations, e.g. [30], [39], [40], appear as background or comparison, and none is used to justify the uniqueness theorems or to forbid alternative approaches. A possible gap in the 2D uniqueness proof, namely using the magnetic difference field b-bar with nonzero trace as a test function and estimating the boundary term without a normal-derivative regularity for weak solutions, is a correctness concern about the proof as written, not a circularity: it does not make the theorem's conclusion identical to its assumptions. Therefore the appropriate circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests only on standard PDE theory: Stokes and elliptic/parabolic regularity, compactness, and the known uniform attractor criterion. No free parameters are fitted and no new entities are postulated. The main issue is procedural, not axiomatic: one existence proof is only sketched.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Stokes operator regularity: for Su = -Δu + ∇P, ||u||_{H^2} + ||P||_{H^1/R} ≤ c||Su||_{L^2} for u∈D(S).
    Lemma 2.1, used in the strong solution and attractor estimates in Sections 3.2 and 4.2.
  • standard math Elliptic lifting h_E solves -Δh_E = 0 in Ω, h_E = h on Γ, with regularity h_E ∈ H^1([0,T];L^2)∩L∞([0,T];H^{1/2})∩L^2([0,T];H^1) and the norm bounds of Lemma 2.2.
    Used to convert time-dependent boundary data into an interior forcing in (3.19) and (4.7).
  • standard math Parabolic lifting h_p solves ∂t h_p - Δh_p = 0 with h_p(0)=b0 and h_p=h on Γ, with estimates (2.3)-(2.4) from Lemma 2.3.
    Used in the strong solution proof (Section 3.2) and in the attractor proof.
  • standard math Brezis-Gallouet inequality ||g||_{L∞} ≤ c||g||_{H^1}(1+ln(||g||_{H^2}^2/||g||_{H^1}^2))^{1/2} in 2D.
    Lemma 2.4, used in the estimate of R1 in the uniform attractor proof (Section 4.2).
  • standard math Uniform attractor existence theorem (Theorem 4.1) for a family of processes that is uniformly ω-limit compact and has a weakly compact absorbing set, with the kernel characterization.
    External criterion from [31] used to conclude Theorem 1.3.
  • domain assumption The physical coefficients Re, Rm, S can be normalized to 1 by rescaling without changing the analysis.
    Stated in the introduction after (1.5): the values of those coefficients do not play a role in the subsequent analysis.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Global well-posedness of magnetohydrodynamic equations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AH3HNC26

@misc{pith2026190802636,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Global well-posedness of magnetohydrodynamic equations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AH3HNC26}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02636}
}
read the original abstract

We study the global well-posedness of magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) equations. The hydrodynamic system consists of the Navier-Stokes equations for the fluid velocity coupled with a reduced from of the Maxwell equations for the magnetic field. The fluid velocity is assumed to satisfy a no-slip boundary condition, while the magnetic field is subject to a time-dependent Dirichlet boundary condition. We first establish the global existence of weak and strong solutions to (1.1)-(1.4). Then we derive the existence of a uniform attractor for (1.1)-(1.4).

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Abidi, G

    H. Abidi, G. Gui, P . Zhang, On the well-posedness of 3 D inhomogeneous Navier-Stokes equations in the critical spa ces, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 204(1) (2012) 189-230

    work page 2012

  2. [2]

    Abidi, G

    H. Abidi, G. Gui, P . Zhang, Well-posedness of 3 D inhomogeneous Navier-Stokes equations with highly oscill atory velocity field, J. Math. Pures Appl., 100(1) (2013) 166-203

    work page 2013

  3. [3]

    Alekseev, Solvability of a homogeneous initial-boundary value problem for equations of magnetohydrodynamic s of an ideal fluid, Dinamika Sploshn

    G.V . Alekseev, Solvability of a homogeneous initial-boundary value problem for equations of magnetohydrodynamic s of an ideal fluid, Dinamika Sploshn. Sredy, 57 (1982) 3-20

    work page 1982

  4. [4]

    Barbu, G

    V . Barbu, G. Da Prato, Existence and ergodicity for the tw o-dimensional stochastic magnetohydrodynamics equation s, Appl. Math. Optim., 56(2) (2007) 145-168

    work page 2007

  5. [5]

    Br´ ezis, T

    H. Br´ ezis, T. Gallouet, Nonlinear Schr¨ odinger evolution equations, Nonlinear Anal., 4 (1980) 677-681

    work page 1980

  6. [6]

    Ca ffarelli, R

    L. Ca ffarelli, R. Kohn, L. Nirenberg, Partial regularity of suitab le weak solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 35(6) (1982) 771-831

    work page 1982

  7. [7]

    Cannone, Harmonic analysis tools for solving the inco mpressible Navier-Stokes equations, in: Handbook of Mathe - matical Fluid Dynamics, vol

    M. Cannone, Harmonic analysis tools for solving the inco mpressible Navier-Stokes equations, in: Handbook of Mathe - matical Fluid Dynamics, vol. III, North-Holland, Amsterda m, 2004, pp. 161-244

    work page 2004

  8. [8]

    Cannone, Ondelettes, paraproduits et Navier-Stokes , Diderot Editeur, Paris, 1995

    M. Cannone, Ondelettes, paraproduits et Navier-Stokes , Diderot Editeur, Paris, 1995

    1995

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    C. Cao, J. Wu, Global regularity for the 2 D MHD equations with mixed partial dissipation and magnetic d iffusion, Adv. Math., 226(2) (2011) 1803-1822

    2011

  2. [10]

    Chepyzhov, M

    V . Chepyzhov, M. Vishik, Attractors for Equations of Ma thematical Physics, Amer. Math. Soc. Colloq. Publ., 49, Pro vi- dence RI, 2002

    2002

  3. [11]

    Climent-Ezquerra, F

    B. Climent-Ezquerra, F. Guillen-Gonz´ alez, M. Moreno -Iraberte, Regularity and timeperiodicity for a nematic li quid crystal model, Nonlinear Anal., 71 (2009) 530-549

    2009

  4. [12]

    Constantin, C

    P . Constantin, C. Foias, Navier-Stokes equations, Uni v. of Chicago Press, 1988

    1988

  5. [13]

    Duraut, J.L

    G. Duraut, J.L. Lions, In´ equations en thermo´ elasticit´ e et magn´ eto-hydrodynamique, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 46 (1972) 241-79

    1972

  6. [14]

    Escauriaza, G.A

    L. Escauriaza, G.A. Seregin, V . ˇSverak, L3, ∞-solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations and backward uni queness, Russian Math. Surveys, 58(2) (2003) 211-250

    2003

  7. [15]

    Fujita, T

    H. Fujita, T. Kato, On the Navier-Stokes initial value p roblem. I, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 16 (1964) 269-315

    1964

  8. [16]

    Gui, Global well-posedness of the two-dimensional i ncompressible magnetohydrodynamics system with variable density and electrical conductivity, J

    G. Gui, Global well-posedness of the two-dimensional i ncompressible magnetohydrodynamics system with variable density and electrical conductivity, J. Funct. Anal., 267( 5) (2014) 1488-1539

    2014

  9. [17]

    C. He, X. Huang, Y . Wang, On some new global existence res ults for 3 D magnetohydrodynamic equations, Nonlinearity, 27(2) (2014) 343-352

    2014

  10. [18]

    C. He, Z. Xin, On the regularity of weak solutions to the m agnetohydrodynamic equations, J. Di fferential Equations, 213(2) (2005) 235-254

    2005

  11. [19]

    C. He, Z. Xin, Partial regularity of suitable weak solut ions to the incompressible magnetohydrodynamic equations , J. Funct. Anal., 227(1) (2005) 113-152

    2005

  12. [20]

    Hopf, ¨Uber die Anfangswertaufgabe f¨ ur die hydrodynamischen Grundgleichungen, Math

    E. Hopf, ¨Uber die Anfangswertaufgabe f¨ ur die hydrodynamischen Grundgleichungen, Math. Nachr., 4 (1951) 213-231

    1951

  13. [21]

    X. Hu, D. Wang, Global existence and large time behavior of solutions to the three-dimensional equations of compressible magnetohydrodynamic flows, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 197( 1) (2010) 203-238. GLOBAL WELL-POSEDNESS OF MHD 21

    2010

  14. [22]

    H. Jia, V . ˇSver´ ak, Local-in-space estimates near initial time for weak solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations and forward self-similar solutions, Invent. Math., 196(1) (2014) 233- 265

    2014

  15. [23]

    H. Koch, D. Tataru, Well-posedness for the Navier-Stok es equations, Adv. Math., 157(1) (2001) 22-35

    2001

  16. [24]

    Kozono, Weak and classical solutions of the two-dime nsional magnetohydrodynamic equations, Tohoku Math

    H. Kozono, Weak and classical solutions of the two-dime nsional magnetohydrodynamic equations, Tohoku Math. J., 41(3) (1989) 471-488

    1989

  17. [25]

    Leray, Sur le mouvement d’un liquide visqueux emplis sant l’espace, Acta Math., 63(1) (1934) 193-248

    J. Leray, Sur le mouvement d’un liquide visqueux emplis sant l’espace, Acta Math., 63(1) (1934) 193-248

    1934

  18. [26]

    Lin, A new proof of the Ca ffarelliCKohnCNirenberg theorem, Comm

    F. Lin, A new proof of the Ca ffarelliCKohnCNirenberg theorem, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 51 ( 3) (1998) 241-257

    1998

  19. [27]

    F. Lin, C. Liu, Nonparabolic dissipative systems model ling the flow of liquid crystals, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 48 (1995) 501-537

    1995

  20. [28]

    Lions, E

    J.-L. Lions, E. Magenes, Nonhomogeneous Boundary V alu e Problems and Applications, vol. 1, Springer, New Y ork, 1972

    1972

  21. [29]

    Lions, Mathematical topics in fluid mechanics, vol

    P .L. Lions, Mathematical topics in fluid mechanics, vol . 1, Oxford Science Publications, 1996

    1996

  22. [30]

    Q. Liu, C. Wang, X. Zhang, J. Zhou, On optimal boundary co ntrol of Ericksen-Leslie system in dimension two, arXiv: 1811.03512

    arXiv

  23. [31]

    S. Lu, H. Wu, C. Zhong, Attractors for nonautomous 2 D Navier-Stokes equations with normal external forces, Disc rete Contin. Dyn. Syst., 13 (2005) 701-719

    2005

  24. [32]

    Meyer, Wavelets, paraproducts and Navier-Stokes equations, Current developments in mathematics 1996, International Press, PO Box 38-2872, Cambridge, MA 02238-2872, 1999

    Y . Meyer, Wavelets, paraproducts and Navier-Stokes equations, Current developments in mathematics 1996, International Press, PO Box 38-2872, Cambridge, MA 02238-2872, 1999

    1996

  25. [33]

    Sango, Magnetohydrodynamic turbulent flows: existe nce results, Phys

    M. Sango, Magnetohydrodynamic turbulent flows: existe nce results, Phys. D, 239(12) (2010) 912-923

    2010

  26. [34]

    Schmidt, On a magnetohydrodynamic problem of Eule r type, J

    P .G. Schmidt, On a magnetohydrodynamic problem of Eule r type, J. Di fferential Equations, 74(2) (1988) 318-335

    1988

  27. [35]

    Secchi, On the equations of ideal incompressible mag netohydrodynamics, Rend

    P . Secchi, On the equations of ideal incompressible mag netohydrodynamics, Rend. Semin. Mat. Univ. Padova, 90 (199 3) 103-119

  28. [36]

    Sermange, R

    M. Sermange, R. Temam, Some mathematical questions rel ated to the MHD equations Commun. Pure Appl. Math., 36 (1983) 635-664

    1983

  29. [37]

    Simon, Compact sets in the space Lp(0, T ; B), Ann

    J. Simon, Compact sets in the space Lp(0, T ; B), Ann. Math. Pura Appl., 146(1) (1987) 65-96

    1987

  30. [38]

    Y . Sun, W. Wang, Z. Zhang, Nonlinear stability of the current-vortex sheet to the incompressible MHD equations, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 71(2) (2018) 356-403

    2018

  31. [39]

    Z. Tan, W. Wu, J. Zhou, Existence and uniqueness of mild s olutions to the magneto-hydro-dynamic equations, Appl. Math. Lett., 77 (2018) 27-34

    2018

  32. [40]

    Z. Tan, W. Wu, J. Zhou, Global existence and decay estima te of solutions to magneto-micropolar fluid equations, J. Differential Equations, 266(7) (2019) 4137-4169

    2019

  33. [41]

    Taylor, Partial Pi fferential Equations, V ol

    M. Taylor, Partial Pi fferential Equations, V ol. I, Applied Math. Sciences, vol. 115, Springer, New Y ork, 1996

    1996

  34. [42]

    Temam, Infinite-dimensional Dynamical Systems in Me chanics and Physics, 2nd edition, Appl

    R. Temam, Infinite-dimensional Dynamical Systems in Me chanics and Physics, 2nd edition, Appl. Math. Sci., 68, Springer V erlag, New Y ork Berlin Heidelberg, 1997

    1997

  35. [43]

    Temam, Navier-Stokes Equations, Theory and Numeric al Analysis, Second edition, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1979

    R. Temam, Navier-Stokes Equations, Theory and Numeric al Analysis, Second edition, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1979

    1979

  36. [44]

    V asseur, A new proof of partial regularity of solut ions to Navier-Stokes equations, NoDEA Nonlinear Di fferential Equations Appl., 14(5-6) (2007) 753-785

    A.F. V asseur, A new proof of partial regularity of solut ions to Navier-Stokes equations, NoDEA Nonlinear Di fferential Equations Appl., 14(5-6) (2007) 753-785

    2007

  37. [45]

    W. Yang, Q. Jiu, J. Wu, The 3 D incompressible magnetohydrodynamic equations with fract ional partial dissipation, J. Differential Equations, 266(1) (2019) 630-652

    2019

  38. [46]

    X. Zhai, Z. Yin, Global well-posedness for the 3 D incompressible inhomogeneous Navier-Stokes equations an d MHD equations, J. Di fferential Equations, 262(3) (2017) 1359-1412. School of Ma thema ticalSciences, Xiamen University, Xiamen, 361005, China. E-mail address, C.F. Ai: ...

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.