Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 48 references

MHS equilibria in the non-resistive limit to the randomly forced resistive magnetic relaxation equations

T0 review · 1 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Randomly forced resistive magnetic relaxation has a non-resistive limit: a random MHS equilibrium; in 2D the limiting law avoids all finite Fourier modes.

desk verdict A substantial and largely correct stochastic-construction paper whose headline 2D non-concentration result rests on a stated but fragile non-degeneracy assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.08394 v1 pith:RGNGWIEJ submitted 2025-06-10 math.AP

Ken Abe , In-Jee Jeong , Federico Pasqualotto , Naoki Sato This is my paper
classification math.AP MSC 35Q3135Q35
keywords magneticrelaxationequationsmagnetohydrostaticequilibriuminvariantmeasurenon-resistivelimitstochasticpartialdifferentialfiniteFouriermodesHausdorffdimensionrandomMHDequilibria
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

Randomly forcing the resistive magnetic relaxation equations with noise of strength $\sqrt{\kappa}$ gives pathwise global well-posedness and invariant measures $\mu_\kappa$ for every resistivity $\kappa>0$. The paper's main theorem says that as $\kappa\to 0$ these statistically stationary solutions converge almost surely to a time-independent magnetohydrostatic (MHS) equilibrium $B\in H^1(\mathbb{T}^d)$ with law $\mu_0$, so the random relaxation procedure constructs MHS equilibria from general initial data rather than from data with special symmetries. In two dimensions the limiting measure is infinite-dimensional in a strong sense: $\mu_0$ assigns zero mass to every compact subset of $H^1(\mathbb{T}^2)$ with finite Hausdorff dimension, and in particular almost every realization is not a finite Fourier mode solution. This matters because the statistical route reaches equilibria beyond the simple finite-mode states whose structure is explicitly classified.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is a statistical energy balance for stationary solutions: every invariant measure of (1.3) satisfies $E(\kappa\|\nabla B_\kappa\|_H^2+\|u_\kappa\|_{\dot H^\gamma}^2)=\kappa C_0/2$ together with the exponential bound $E\exp(\rho\|B_\kappa\|_H^2)\le (C_0+1)e^{\rho(C_0+1)}$. After dividing by $\kappa$ this forces the velocity field $u_\kappa$ to vanish like $\sqrt{\kappa}$ while $B_\kappa$ stays bounded, so the constitutive law $\nabla p_\kappa=B_\kappa\cdot\nabla B_\kappa-(-\Delta)^\gamma u_\kappa$ closes in the limit to $\nabla p=B\cdot\nabla B$. The limit passage itself rests on tightness of the laws of the stationary solutions in the path space $X_T^{-\varepsilon}=C([0,T];H^{-\varepsilon})\cap L^2(0,T;H^{1-\varepsilon})$, obtained by decomposing $B_\kappa$ into three pieces with different temporal regularities and using compactness of the relevant Bochner-space embedding, and on realizing the limiting law on a common probability space so the convergence is almost sure. For the 2D theorem, the additional machinery is absolute continuity: stochastic calculus identities for the stationary processes $E(B)$, $M(B)$, and Casimir functionals $C(B)$, combined with a lower-bound estimate on the quadratic variation matrix $\sum_j b_j^2(f'(\phi),d_j)^2$, whose non-singularity for nonconstant $\phi$ follows from $b_j\neq 0$ for all $j$. Absolute continuity of these scalar laws under $\mu_0$ is what rules out concentration on finite-Hausdorff-dimension compact sets.

What would settle it

Take the 2D system with a degenerate Wiener process in which exactly one coefficient $b_j$ is zero and all others are nonzero. If the corresponding limit measure $\mu_0$ assigns positive mass to a compact subset of $H^1$ with finite Hausdorff dimension, for example the span of the unstirred eigenfunction, then Theorem 1.3 is false; the paper's lemmas locate the exact step where this degeneracy would break the argument.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes Theorem 1.1: for $d\ge 2$, $\gamma>d/2$, and noise with finite $C_0$, the system (1.3) has invariant measures $\mu_\kappa$. Along a subsequence $\kappa\to 0$ the measures converge weakly to $\mu_0$ on $H^{1-\varepsilon}(\mathbb{T}^d)$, and statistically stationary solutions $B_\kappa$ with law $\mu_\kappa$ converge almost surely, on a suitable probability space, to a random field $B$ in $C([0,\infty);H^{-\varepsilon})\cap L^2_{\mathrm{loc}}([0,\infty);H^{1-\varepsilon})$. The limit $B$ is time-independent, lies in $H\cap H^1(\mathbb{T}^d)$, and satisfies $\nabla p=B\cdot\nabla B$ with $\nabla\cdot B=0$ almost surely, so it is an MHS equilibrium with law $D(B)=\mu_0$. Theorem 1.3 adds the 2D conclusion: with $b_j\neq 0$ for every $j$, $\mu_0$ gives zero mass to every compact subset of $H\cap H^1(\mathbb{T}^2)$ with finite Hausdorff dimension, hence $\mu_0(F_{\mathrm{FFM}})=0$ for the set $F_{\mathrm{FFM}}$ of finite Fourier mode MHS equilibria. The paper also records explicit mean identities for the limit measure in low dimensions, $E\|B\|_H^2=C_{-1}/2$ in $d=2$ and $E(\nabla\times B,B)_H=C_{-1/2}/2$ in $d=3$, and extends the construction to hyper-resistivity in Theorem 5.16.

Load-bearing premise

The 2D conclusion needs the noise to stir every Fourier mode ($b_j\neq 0$ for all $j$); if even one mode is unstirred, the covariance that drives the absolute-continuity proof can become singular and the infinite-dimensionality conclusion collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every $d\ge 2$ and $\gamma>d/2$ the construction yields a probability measure $\mu_0$ whose realizations are $H^1$-regular MHS equilibria, so the random relaxation procedure generates equilibria from arbitrary initial data rather than only from specially chosen data.
  • The velocity field of the statistically stationary solutions vanishes as $\kappa\to 0$ at the rate $\sqrt{\kappa}$ in $L^2(0,T;\dot H^\gamma)$, while the magnetic field remains bounded and converges almost surely in the stated spaces.
  • In two dimensions, $\mu_0$ gives zero mass to every compact subset of $H^1(\mathbb{T}^2)$ with finite Hausdorff dimension; in particular, $\mu_0(F_{\mathrm{FFM}})=0$, so almost every realization is not a finite Fourier mode solution.
  • For $d=2$ and $d=3$ the limit measure has explicit mean values, $E\|B\|_H^2=C_{-1}/2$ and $E(\nabla\times B,B)_H=C_{-1/2}/2$, respectively; no analogous formulas are obtained for $d\ge 4$.
  • The same fluctuation-dissipation argument extends to hyper-resistivity with $(-\kappa)(-\Delta)^\alpha$ and yields a random MHS equilibrium in $H^\alpha(\mathbb{T}^d)$ for every $\alpha\ge 1$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A numerical test on $\mathbb{T}^2$ with small $\kappa$ and forcing supported on many modes should show that the sampled fields' Fourier spectra do not collapse to finitely many modes, with the mean-square potential approaching $C_{-1}/2$; this would directly confirm the 2D conclusion.
  • If one of the forcing coefficients $b_j$ is set to zero, the covariance matrix can become singular for nonconstant $\phi$, so the 2D conclusion may fail or become open; degenerate forcing is a natural place to seek counterexamples.
  • In 3D the paper leaves the finite-Fourier-mode trichotomy unresolved; the absolute continuity of the helicity law suggests $\mu_0$ may also avoid finite Fourier mode equilibria there, but proving it would require handling the different geometry of 3D finite Fourier equilibria.
  • The same $\sqrt{\kappa}$ scaling of noise and dissipation may apply to other relaxation-type PDEs with a convex conserved quantity, making the invariant-measure route a general equilibrium-construction scheme.
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

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the randomly forced resistive magnetic relaxation equations (1.3) on the flat torus T^d, with resistivity κ and a noise √κ∂tζ built from eigenfunctions e_j with amplitudes b_j. It proves pathwise global well-posedness (Theorem 3.8), existence of invariant measures μκ via Krylov–Bogoliubov (Lemma 4.8), and a non-resistive limit: after passing to a subsequence, statistically stationary solutions Bκ converge almost surely in C([0,T];H^{-ε})∩L^2(0,T;H^{1-ε}) to a time-independent random field B∈H∩H^1 which satisfies the MHS equilibrium equations (1.2), with law D(B)=μ0 (Theorem 1.1). Under the additional assumption that b_j≠0 for every j, the paper proves for d=2 that μ0 gives zero mass to every compact subset of H^1 of finite Hausdorff dimension, and in particular μ0(F_FFM)=0 (Theorem 1.3). The tools include Itô formulas, balance relations for energy/helicity/mean-square potential, compactness in Bochner spaces, Skorokhod's theorem, and Krylov's estimates for stationary processes.

Significance. If correct, the paper provides a rigorous statistical construction of MHS equilibria by a fluctuation-dissipation limit, extending Kuksin's method for 2D Euler to magnetic relaxation. The 2D non-concentration theorem is a strong structural statement about the limiting measure: it excludes support on finite Fourier mode equilibria, and the proof via Casimir invariants and absolute continuity is original in this context. Strengths include the self-contained treatment of well-posedness with cubic estimates, the explicit balance relations (5.1)–(5.4), the compactness argument for lifted invariant measures, and the honest statement of hypotheses. The main limitation is the non-degeneracy assumption on the noise for Theorem 1.3; the theorem is stated with that assumption, but the abstract and introduction would benefit from making this condition equally prominent.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract / Theorem 1.3] Theorem 1.3 and the 2D statement in the abstract are proved only under the full non-degeneracy hypothesis b_j≠0 for all j∈N. This hypothesis enters essentially in Lemma 6.11 through positivity of ς=C_{-1}-sup_j b_j^2/λ_j and the small-ball estimate (6.13), and in Lemma 6.17 through the conclusion det σ(f'(φ))>0, which uses completeness of {√λ_j d_j} together with b_j≠0. If only finitely many modes are forced, the covariance matrix σ has rank at most N, the Krylov step (6.24) degenerates, and the argument gives no information about concentration on finite-dimensional compact sets. The theorem is honestly stated in §1.2.2, but the abstract presents the non-concentration result without the hypothesis; the authors should state the assumption in the abstract and explicitly flag the degenerate-noise case as open.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Lemma 5.12 / Theorem 1.1] The Skorokhod construction is written for a fixed T, while Theorem 1.1 asserts convergence in C([0,∞);H^{-ε})∩L^2_loc([0,∞);H^{1-ε}). A diagonal argument in T and consistency of the laws across different T should be stated explicitly.
  2. [Theorem 5.15, Eq. (5.27)] The equality E||B||^2_H=C_{-1}/2 for d=2 requires passing the second moment E||Bκ||^2_H to the limit. This does not follow from convergence in P(H^{1-ε}) alone; it is recoverable from the uniform exponential bound (5.2), which gives uniform integrability of ||Bκ||^2_H, but that argument is not written. The same remark applies to (5.26).
  3. [Section 5.5 / Proposition 5.14] In the proof of Theorem 1.1, the convergence (5.24) is stated as Bκ⊗Bκ→B⊗B in L^1(T^d×(0,T)) almost surely; this follows from the a.s. convergence Bκ→B in L^2(0,T;H) and the uniform bound on Bκ in L^2(0,T;H^1), but the intermediate step using the boundedness from (5.6) should be mentioned.
  4. [Various] There are many minor typographical errors, including 'satifies' in Proposition 5.2, 'elemenrary caluculation' and 'caluculation' in Appendix A, and the phrase '0 < Γ' in the proof of Theorem 6.1, which should be '0∉Γ'. A careful proofreading pass is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the random MHS equilibrium is constructed as a genuine weak limit of invariant measures, and the non-concentration theorem rests on an explicitly stated non-degeneracy hypothesis, not on a fitted or self-referential input.

full rationale

The paper's central construction is self-contained and non-circular. The invariant measures μκ are obtained by the Krylov–Bogoliubov procedure from the energy balance (4.1), and the constants C0, C_{-1}, C_{-1/2} are defined directly from the noise amplitudes b_j in (1.6)–(1.7); they are inputs, not fitted parameters. The non-resistive limit μ0 is a weak limit of μκ via Prokhorov compactness, with bounds (5.1)–(5.4) derived from Ito formulas and stationarity. The conclusion that the limit B is a time-independent MHS equilibrium follows by passing κ→0 in the mild formulation using the bounds on the velocity, resistivity, and noise terms, so the target equation (1.2) is not assumed in the construction. The 2D non-concentration result in Theorem 1.3 is proved through absolute continuity of the laws of energy, mean-square potential, and Casimir invariants; the key input b_j≠0 for all j is an explicitly stated hypothesis of the theorem, and the auxiliary facts (orthonormal basis of √λ_j d_j, Krylov's estimate, local-time identity) are either proved in the appendix or taken from the independent reference [KS12]. The reliance on non-degenerate noise is a genuine assumption that limits the theorem's scope, but it is not circular: the conclusion is not equivalent to that assumption by construction. The only self-citation is contextual (e.g., [CP23] for prior work on MHS equilibria), and it is not load-bearing for the main theorems. No fitted quantity is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' own prior work to force the choice of limit measure.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The derivation rests on standard stochastic analysis and harmonic analysis tools, plus the explicit model assumptions (torus, divergence-free, noise covariance). The only modeler-chosen parameters are the noise coefficients and the hyperviscosity exponent; no parameter is fitted to a target result. No invented entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Noise coefficients {b_j}
    Define the forcing covariance C_s = Σ λ_j^s b_j^2. They are inputs of the model, chosen ab initio, not fitted to data; the theorems hold uniformly as long as C0<∞ and, for Theorem 1.3, b_j≠0 for all j.
  • Hyperviscosity exponent γ
    Assumed γ>d/2 throughout; it determines the order of the Laplacian in the constitutive law and is a model choice, not fitted.
  • Resistivity κ
    Positive parameter taken to zero; part of the asymptotic construction.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Ito calculus for infinite-dimensional Ito processes with constant diffusion
    Used throughout Sections 4 and 6 for energy, helicity, mean-square potential, and Casimir invariants; standard results from [KS12, DPZ92].
  • standard math Krylov-Bogoliubov, Prokhorov, Skorokhod, Portmanteau theorems
    Used in Sections 4.3 and 5.2 to construct invariant measures and pass to limits.
  • standard math Sobolev embedding and Lions-Aubin-Simon compactness
    Used in Section 5.3 for compact embedding of KT into X^{-ε}_T.
  • domain assumption Cubic estimate for K_γ extends from K_{d/2} (Remark 2.15)
    The paper proves the estimate for γ=d/2 and asserts by boundedness of (-Δ)^{-(γ-d/2)} that it holds for γ>d/2; this is used in Proposition 5.9.
  • domain assumption Noise structure: Wiener process ζ with coefficients b_j e_j and finite C0; b_j≠0 for all j in the 2D theorem
    The whole construction is for this class of forcing; Theorem 1.3 explicitly assumes b_j≠0.
  • domain assumption The torus T^d, average-zero divergence-free space H, and hyperviscosity γ>d/2
    The model is posed on the flat torus; boundary effects are not considered in the main theorems.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of MHS equilibria in the non-resistive limit to the randomly forced resistive magnetic relaxation equations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RGNGWIEJ

@misc{pith2026250608394,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: MHS equilibria in the non-resistive limit to the randomly forced resistive magnetic relaxation equations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RGNGWIEJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.08394}
}
abstract

We consider randomly forced resistive magnetic relaxation equations (MRE) with resistivity $\kappa>0$ and a force proportional to $\sqrt{\kappa}\ $ on the flat $d$-torus $\mathbb{T}^{d}$ for $d\geq 2$. We show the path-wise global well-posedness of the system and the existence of the invariant measures, and construct a random magnetohydrostatic (MHS) equilibrium $B(x)$ in $H^{1}(\mathbb{T}^{d})$ with law $D(B)=\mu$ as a non-resistive limit $\kappa\to 0$ of statistically stationary solutions $B_{\kappa}(x,t)$. For $d=2$, the measure $\mu$ does not concentrate on any compact sets in $H^{1}(\mathbb{T}^{2})$ with finite Hausdorff dimension. In particular, all realizations of the random MHS equilibrium $B(x)$ are almost surely not finite Fourier mode solutions.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    V. I. Arnold and B. A. Khesin. Topological methods in hydrodynamics. 125:xx+455, 2021

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Bedrossian, M

    J. Bedrossian, M. Coti Zelati, and N. Glatt-Holtz. Invariant measures for passive scalars in the small noise inviscid limit. Comm. Math. Phys. , 348(1):101--127, (2016)

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    Beekie, S

    R. Beekie, S. Friedlander, and V. Vicol. On M offatt's magnetic relaxation equations. Comm. Math. Phys. , 390:1311--1339, (2022)

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    D. Biskamp. Nonlinear magnetohydrodynamics. pages xiv+378, 1993

    work page 1993

  5. [5]

    H. Bae, H. Kwon, and J. Shin. G lobal solutions to S tokes- M agneto equations with fractional dissipations. arXiv:2310.03255 https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.03255

    work page Pith review arXiv

  6. [6]

    B\'enyi and T

    \'A. B\'enyi and T. Oh. The S obolev inequality on the torus revisited. Publ. Math. Debrecen , 83(3):359--374, (2013)

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    Y. Brenier. Topology-preserving diffusion of divergence-free vector fields and magnetic relaxation. Comm. Math. Phys. , 330:757--770, (2014)

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Bouchet and A

    F. Bouchet and A. Venaille. Statistical mechanics of two-dimensional and geophysical flows. Physics Reports , 515:227--295, (2012)

    work page 2012

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    Buckmaster and V

    T. Buckmaster and V. Vicol. Convex integration and phenomenologies in turbulence. EMS Surv. Math. Sci. , 6:173--263, (2019)

    2019

  2. [10]

    Bedrossian and V

    J. Bedrossian and V. Vicol. The mathematical analysis of the incompressible E uler and N avier- S tokes equations---an introduction. 225:xiii+218, [2022] 2022

    2022

  3. [11]

    Constantin, T

    P. Constantin, T. D. Drivas, and D. Ginsberg. Flexibility and rigidity in steady fluid motion. Commun. Math. Phys. , 385:521--563, (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    Cardona, N

    R. Cardona, N. Duignan, and D. Perrella. A symmetry of M H D E quilibria for G eneric A dapted M etrics. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. , 249(1), (2025)

    2025

  5. [13]

    Constantin and F

    P. Constantin and F. Pasqualotto. M agnetic R elaxation of a V oigt-- M H D S ystem. Commun. Math. Phys. , 402:1931--1952, (2023)

    2023

  6. [14]

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

    2023

  7. [15]

    De Lellis and L

    C. De Lellis and L. Sz\'ekelyhidi, Jr. Dissipative continuous E uler flows. Invent. Math. , 193(2):377--407, (2013)

    2013

  8. [16]

    Da Prato and J

    G. Da Prato and J. Zabczyk. Stochastic equations in infinite dimensions , volume 44 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992

    1992

  9. [17]

    Da Prato and J

    G. Da Prato and J. Zabczyk. Ergodicity for infinite-dimensional systems , volume 229 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996

    1996

  10. [18]

    R. M. Dudley. Real analysis and probability. 74:x+555, 2002. Revised reprint of the 1989 original

    2002

  11. [19]

    Elgindi, W

    T. Elgindi, W. Hu, and V. S ver \'a k. On 2d incompressible euler equations with partial damping. Commun. Math. Phys. , 355:145--159, (2017)

    2017

  12. [20]

    Enciso and D

    A. Enciso and D. Peralta-Salas. Obstructions to topological relaxation for generic magnetic fields. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. , 249(6), (2025)

    2025

  13. [21]

    Enciso, D

    A. Enciso, D. Peralta-Salas, and F. Torres de Lizaur. Knotted structures in high-energy B eltrami fields on the torus and the sphere. Ann. Sci. \' E c. Norm. Sup\' e r. (4) , 50(4):995--1016, (2017)

    2017

  14. [22]

    Enciso, J

    A. Enciso, J. Pe \ n afiel-Tom \'a s, and D. Peralta-Salas. S teady 3d E uler flows via a topology-preserving convex integration scheme. arXiv:2501.13632 https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.13632

    arXiv

  15. [23]

    L. C. Evans. Partial differential equations , volume 19 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics . American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, second edition, 2010

    2010

  16. [24]

    Falconer

    K. Falconer. Fractal geometry . John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester, 1990. Mathematical foundations and applications

    1990

  17. [25]

    Faraco, S

    D. Faraco, S. Lindberg, and L. Sz\' e kelyhidi. Rigorous results on conserved and dissipated quantities in ideal MHD turbulence. Geophys. Astrophys. Fluid Dyn. , 116(4):237--260, (2022)

    2022

  18. [26]

    F\"oldes and M

    J. F\"oldes and M. Sy. Invariant measures and global well posedness for the SQG equation. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 241(1):187--230, (2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    Glatt-Holtz, V

    N. Glatt-Holtz, V. S ver\' a k, and V. Vicol. On inviscid limits for the stochastic N avier- S tokes equations and related models. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 217:619--649, (2015)

    2015

  20. [28]

    Gerbeau, C

    J. Gerbeau, C. Le Bris, and T. Leli\`evre. Mathematical methods for the magnetohydrodynamics of liquid metals . Numerical Mathematics and Scientific Computation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006

    2006

  21. [29]

    H. Grad. Toroidal containment of a plasma. The Physics of Fluids , 10:137--154, (1967)

    1967

  22. [30]

    Hasegawa

    A. Hasegawa. Self-organization processes in continuous media. Advances in Physics , 34:1--42, (1985)

    1985

  23. [31]

    Huang, J

    Y.-M. Huang, J. K. J. Hew, A. Brown, and A. Bhattacharjee. Computation of magnetohydrodynamic equilibria with voigt regularization. arXiv:2502.19594 https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.19594

    arXiv

  24. [32]

    Ji and W

    Y. Ji and W. Tan. Global well-posedness of a 3d stokes-magneto equations with fractional magnetic diffusion. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. B , 26(6):3271--3278, (2021)

    2021

  25. [33]

    Khesin, G

    B. Khesin, G. Misio ek, and A. Shnirelman. Geometric hydrodynamics in open problems. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. , 247(2):Paper No. 15, 43, (2023)

    2023

  26. [34]

    Khesin, D

    B. Khesin, D. Peralta-Salas, and C. Yang. A basis of C asimirs in 3 D magnetohydrodynamics. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN , (18):13645--13660, (2021)

    2021

  27. [35]

    Kuksin and A

    S. Kuksin and A. Shirikyan. Randomly forced cgl equation: stationary measures and the inviscid limit. J. Phys. , 37:3805--3822, (2004)

    2004

  28. [36]

    Kuksin and A

    S. Kuksin and A. Shirikyan. Mathematics of two-dimensional turbulence , volume 194 of Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012

    2012

  29. [37]

    S. B. Kuksin. The E ulerian limit for 2 D statistical hydrodynamics. J. Statist. Phys. , 115(1-2):469--492, (2004)

    2004

  30. [38]

    Kishimoto and T

    N. Kishimoto and T. Yoneda. Characterization of three-dimensional E uler flows supported on finitely many fourier modes. J. Math. Fluid Mech. , 24(74), (2022)

    2022

  31. [39]

    M. Latocca. Construction of high regularity invariant measures for the 2 D E uler equations and remarks on the growth of the solutions. Comm. Partial Differential Equations , 48(1):22--53, (2023)

    2023

  32. [40]

    H. K. Moffatt. Magnetostatic equilibria and analogous E uler flows of arbitrarily complex topology. I . F undamentals. J. Fluid Mech. , 159:359--378, (1985)

    1985

  33. [41]

    H. K. Moffatt. Some topological aspects of fluid dynamics. J. Fluid Mech. , 914:Paper No. P1, 56, (2021)

    2021

  34. [42]

    D. S. McCormick, J. C. Robinson, and J. L. Rodrigo. Existence and uniqueness for a coupled parabolic-elliptic model with applications to magnetic relaxation. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis , 214(2):503--523, (2014)

    2014

  35. [43]

    B. ksendal. Stochastic differential equations . Universitext. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, sixth edition, 2003. An introduction with applications

    2003

  36. [44]

    Shirikyan

    A. Shirikyan. Local times for solutions of the complex ginzburg--landau equation and the inviscid limit. J. Math. Anal. Appl. , 384:130--137, (2011)

    2011

  37. [45]

    J. Simon. Compact sets in the space L^p(0,T;B) . Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4) , 146:65--96, (1987)

    1987

  38. [46]

    M. Sy. Almost sure global well-posedness for the energy supercritical schr \"o dinger equations. J. Math. Pures Appl. , 154:108--145, (2021)

    2021

  39. [47]

    J. Tan. Weak solutions of moffatt's magnetic relaxation equations. arXiv:2311.18407 https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.18407

  40. [48]

    Yoshida and Y

    Z. Yoshida and Y. Giga. Remarks on spectra of operator rot. Math. Z. , 204:235--245, (1990)

    1990

Pith tools

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