REVIEW 1 cited by
Finite time blowup for an averaged three-dimensional Navier-Stokes equation
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
The Navier-Stokes equation on the Euclidean space $\mathbf{R}^3$ can be expressed in the form $\partial_t u = \Delta u + B(u,u)$, where $B$ is a certain bilinear operator on divergence-free vector fields $u$ obeying the cancellation property $\langle B(u,u), u\rangle=0$ (which is equivalent to the energy identity for the Navier-Stokes equation). In this paper, we consider a modification $\partial_t u = \Delta u + \tilde B(u,u)$ of this equation, where $\tilde B$ is an averaged version of the bilinear operator $B$ (where the average involves rotations and Fourier multipliers of order zero), and which also obeys the cancellation condition $\langle \tilde B(u,u), u \rangle = 0$ (so that it obeys the usual energy identity). By analysing a system of ODE related to (but more complicated than) a dyadic Navier-Stokes model of Katz and Pavlovic, we construct an example of a smooth solution to such a averaged Navier-Stokes equation which blows up in finite time. This demonstrates that any attempt to positively resolve the Navier-Stokes global regularity problem in three dimensions has to use finer structure on the nonlinear portion $B(u,u)$ of the equation than is provided by harmonic analysis estimates and the energy identity. We also propose a program for adapting these blowup results to the true Navier-Stokes equations.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Remarks on smoothness and finite-time blowup solutions of the incompressible Navier-Stokes equation
The paper asserts finite-time blowup times for smooth 3D Navier-Stokes solutions, but the arguments only bound how long certain a priori estimates remain valid.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.