Long-Wave Stability And Instability Of Periodic Shear Flows For The 2D Navier-Stokes Equations On The $\beta$-Plane

Dehua Wang; Robin Ming Chen; Tian Dai; Weiqiang Wang

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 36 references

Long-Wave Stability And Instability Of Periodic Shear Flows For The 2D Navier-Stokes Equations On The $\beta$-Plane

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Planetary rotation suppresses the long-wave shear instability on the β-plane, and the paper derives a sharp threshold when rotation and wavelength scale together.

desk verdict A real extension of the long-wave instability theory to the beta-plane, but the advertised sharp transition is only proven for K > nu; the weak-rotation regime is left open. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.06899 v1 pith:SZKAQRHJ submitted 2026-08-07 math.AP

Robin Ming Chen , Tian Dai , Dehua Wang , Weiqiang Wang This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AP MSC 76E0576E09

keywords long-waveinstabilitybeta-planeNavier-StokesequationsshearflowsspectralstabilityKatoreductionYudovichcriterionasymptoticexpansion

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 asks whether planetary rotation can tame the long-wave instability that makes generic periodic shear flows in two-dimensional viscous fluids unstable to very long perturbations. It shows that on the β-plane the Coriolis term modifies the leading-order spectral mechanism: for fixed positive rotation β and viscosity ν, every mean-zero shear profile U becomes linearly stable to all sufficiently long waves. Under the critical scaling β = Kε, where rotation and inverse wavelength are comparable, the paper derives an explicit instability threshold $\|(\partial_{yy} - iK/\nu)^{-1} U'\|_{L^2} > \nu$, generalizing the classical non-rotating criterion. The proof is a perturbative Kato reduction that expands the principal eigenvalue of the linearized operator to second order in the long-wave parameter.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Fourier-reduced linearized operator $L_{\nu,\varepsilon,\beta} = M_{\nu,\varepsilon,\beta} - i\varepsilon R_{\varepsilon,\beta}$ acting on $L^2(\mathbb{T})$, where $M_{\nu,\varepsilon,\beta} = \nu(\partial_{yy} - \varepsilon^2) - \frac{i}{\varepsilon}(U'' - \beta)\Pi_0$ is the unperturbed leading-order piece and $R_{\varepsilon,\beta}$ is the remainder. The argument uses Riesz projections and Kato's reduction to transfer the one-dimensional eigenspace of $M_{\nu,\varepsilon,\beta}$ to that of $L_{\nu,\varepsilon,\beta}$, then expands the eigenvalue by contour integrals and residue computations. The rotation-modified inverse operator $(\partial_{yy} - \frac{i\beta}{\varepsilon\nu})^{-1}$ replaces the singular $\partial_{yy}^{-1}$ of the non-rotating problem and is what makes the stability threshold depend on the ratio $K$.

What would settle it

Numerically compute the spectrum of the linearized operator for a concrete profile such as U(y) = sin y under the scaling β = Kε: if an eigenvalue with positive real part appears while the criterion ‖(∂_yy − iK/ν)^{-1} U'‖_{L²} ≤ ν holds, or if instability persists for fixed β > 0 at arbitrarily small ε, the expansion would be contradicted. A more targeted check is to compute the condition number of the eigenfunction family in Lemma 2.2 over a range of ε and β to test the unproved basis assertion.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.1: for a mean-zero profile U, if ε(1+β)/ν is sufficiently small and ε < β/ν, then the linearized β-plane operator has a simple eigenvalue whose real part is $\frac{\varepsilon^2}{\nu}\big[-\nu^2 - \langle U, (\partial_y^4 + \frac{\beta^2}{\varepsilon^2\nu^2})^{-1} U''\rangle + O(\frac{\varepsilon}{\nu}(1+\beta)^3)\big]$. Because the inner-product term is bounded by a constant times ε²ν²/β², fixed positive rotation forces this real part to be negative for sufficiently small ε, so rotation suppresses the long-wave instability that occurs when β = 0. Under the critical scaling β = Kε, the expansion reduces to the sharp criterion $\|(\partial_{yy} - iK/\nu)^{-1} U'\|_{L^2} > \nu$ for instability, so the ratio K determines whether long-wave perturbations grow or decay. This is presented as the rotating-flow extension of the classical Yudovich threshold.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes without proof that the eigenvectors of the leading-order operator listed in Lemma 2.2 form a basis of L²(T) with controlled constants, and it also assumes a quantitative lower bound on the normalization factor; if either fails, the spectral projections and the eigenvalue expansion are not fully justified.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For any fixed mean-zero profile, positive rotation and viscosity, all sufficiently long-wave perturbations are linearly stable, in contrast to the non-rotating case.
Under the critical scaling β = Kε, instability occurs precisely when the rotation-modified norm of U' exceeds ν; below that threshold the flow is linearly stable.
Setting β = 0 recovers the known non-rotating long-wave instability criterion and the corresponding eigenvalue expansion.
All non-principal modes remain stable: each eigenvalue near −ν(j² + ε²) stays within distance ν/2 of its unperturbed value.
The expansion gives an explicit leading-order formula for the growth or decay rate of the most dangerous mode in terms of U, ν, and β.

Reading between the lines

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

One could test the threshold numerically for a concrete profile such as U(y) = sin y by computing the L² norm of (∂_yy − iK/ν)^{-1} U' and checking whether unstable eigenvalues appear exactly on the predicted side of the curve.
The mechanism suggests that rotation introduces dispersion at zero frequency rather than merely extra damping, so the same competition between shear, viscosity, and rotation may reappear near other coherent structures such as Kolmogorov flows or zonal jets.
If the spectral criterion is sharp, one expects nonlinear instability above the threshold and some form of nonlinear stability below it, although the paper does not analyze the nonlinear dynamics.
The shape of the criterion resembles a Rayleigh–Kuo-type condition with a complex-modified operator, hinting that the viscous threshold may connect to inviscid barotropic instability in the high-Reynolds limit.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper extends the non-rotating long-wave instability theory of Colombo–Dolce–Montalto–Ventura to the beta-plane, and that extension is meaningful. The eigenvalue expansion (1.10) and the modified Yudovich threshold (1.13) are genuinely new, and the observation that fixed positive rotation suppresses long-wave instability (for small enough epsilon) is a solid, likely correct result. The authors track the beta-dependence through the resolvent estimates carefully, and the cancellation structure they exhibit in the second-order expansion is plausible and well explained.

The main soft spot is a gap between what the abstract claims and what the theorem proves. Theorem 1.1 is stated under the hypothesis epsilon < beta/nu, which under the critical scaling beta = K epsilon is exactly K > nu. So the paper proves the sharp transition only in the strong-rotation regime. The weak-rotation regime K <= nu is excluded by the very condition used to make the resolvent bounds work: the contour Gamma_0 around mu_0 comes within distance K/nu <= 1 of the unperturbed eigenvalue -epsilon^2, and the uniform estimate (3.1) fails. The abstract saying the criterion 'reveals a sharp transition' and Remark 1.2 saying weaker rotation allows instability to persist overstate what is actually proved. This is the one load-bearing limitation; the rest are addressable.

There are also two unproved assertions that the reader flagged and that are real, but minor relative to the above. Lemma 2.2 asserts a basis property without proof; the preceding argument only shows linear independence, not completeness. The proof likely needs only finite-dimensional spectral projections, which follow from isolated eigenvalues and compact resolvent, so this may be removable. The lower bound on ||V_0|| used in (5.29) is asserted without a quantitative argument; it looks true since as epsilon -> 0 the relevant expression converges to ||(U''-beta)/(1+beta)||^2 > 0, but it should be written out. There are also typos (e.g., the repeated label V_{1,2}) that should be cleaned up.

Bottom line: the central eigenvalue expansion is probably correct in the regime where it is proven, and the paper deserves serious referee time. A referee should push for a precise statement of what is and is not proven for K <= nu, and for justification (or removal) of Lemma 2.2 and the normalization lower bound. The paper would be a useful contribution after those revisions.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper studies the spectral stability of periodic shear flows for the two-dimensional Navier–Stokes equations on the beta-plane in the long-wave regime. The main result, Theorem 1.1, gives an asymptotic expansion for the principal eigenvalue of the linearized operator L_{ν,ε,β} under the hypotheses ε(1+β)/ν < δ_U and ε < β/ν. The expansion is given in (1.10), and in Remark 1.2 the authors specialize to the critical scaling β=Kε and derive an instability criterion in (1.13), which they interpret as a sharp transition between long-wave stability and instability governed by the ratio K. The proof follows the Kato reduction approach of Colombo, Dolce, Montalto, and Ventura, with new ingredients to handle the β-dependent shift of the principal eigenvalue.

Significance. The result is significant if it holds: it extends Yudovich's classical long-wave instability criterion and the recent rigorous proof in [10] to rotating flows, and it provides an explicit, falsifiable threshold depending only on the shear profile, the viscosity, and the ratio K under the critical scaling. The derivation is parameter-free in the sense that no constants are fitted and the threshold (1.13) is an inequality to be checked rather than a normalization. The main limitation is that the rigorous statement covers only the regime ε<β/ν, which under the critical scaling means K>ν; the full 'sharp transition' claim for all K remains unsupported, and two technical assertions in the proof (the basis property in Lemma 2.2 and the normalization lower bound in Section 5) are not fully justified.

major comments (3)

[Section 5, Eq. (5.29)] The lower bound on the normalization factor is asserted without proof. Specifically, the claim that ∥(Id + iεν/β ∂_yy)^{-1}(U'' - β/(1+β))∥_{L²} has a uniform positive lower bound is not demonstrated, and this bound is needed to justify the O-term in (5.30) when passing from (5.28). Please provide a proof, for example by separating the constant Fourier mode from the nonzero modes and using the fact that εν/β < 1 to lower-bound the nonzero-mode contributions.
[Lemma 2.2] The proof of Lemma 2.2 establishes only that the displayed vectors are eigenvectors and are linearly independent; it does not prove that they form a basis of L²(T). Since the spectral decomposition (4.13)–(4.14) and the isomorphism argument in Section 4 rely on this basis property, either prove the density of the span (e.g., by decomposing each f into its zero and nonzero Fourier modes) or cite a Riesz-basis theorem for rank-one perturbations of diagonal operators.
[Remark 1.2 and abstract] The sharp stability/instability transition under β=Kε is stated without the restriction K>ν, but Theorem 1.1 is proved only under ε<β/ν, which in this scaling is equivalent to K>ν. For K≤ν, the contour Γ0 in Section 3 approaches the unperturbed eigenvalue -ε² within distance at most 1, so the resolvent bound (3.1) and all subsequent estimates (Lemmas 3.1, 3.2, 4.1, and the expansion in Section 5) are not justified. The claims about 'weaker rotation allows it to persist' and the 'sharp transition' should be limited to the K>ν regime unless the K≤ν case is analyzed.

minor comments (5)

[Section 2, Lemma 2.1 proof] The word 'defintion' should be 'definition'.
[Lemma 2.3 statement] The phrase 'an densely defined' should be 'a densely defined'.
[Section 5, expansion of V1] In the decomposition of V1, the first two terms are both labeled V_{1,2}; the second should be V_{1,1} to match the subsequent comparison v_{1,1}=νμ0 V_{1,1} and v_{1,2}=νμ0 V_{1,2}.
[Lemma 4.1 proof] The phrase 'for δ_U, β sufficiently small' is inaccurate; the smallness condition is ε(1+β)/ν < δ_U, and the parameter β itself need not be small. Reword to 'for δ_U and ε(1+β)/ν sufficiently small'.
[Section 5, after Eq. (5.29)] The phrase 'has the lower bound' should be accompanied by an explicit lower bound or a reference to a separate lemma, since the subsequent normalization step depends on this quantitative statement.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the eigenvalue expansion is computed directly from the operator, the threshold is a falsifiable inequality rather than a fitted input, and the cited prior work is external to the authors.

full rationale

Walking the claimed derivation chain, I find no circular step. The main eigenvalue expansion (1.10) is derived by a direct Kato-reduction calculation: the paper defines the eigenvector representative V_{ν,ε,β} = P_{ν,ε,β}[F_{ν,ε,β} - iνε], expands the resolvent Neumann series, evaluates contour integrals by residues, and tracks the cancellation of first-order terms. No parameter is fitted to data, and no external benchmark is used to define the derived quantities. The threshold (1.13) under β = Kε is an explicit inequality in U, ν, and K that is falsifiable and is not fed back into the calculation. The reliance on [10] is methodological and not a self-citation: the author lists do not overlap, and [10] supplies the non-rotating framework rather than the rotation-modified conclusion. Yudovich's criterion appears as a consistency limit (β = 0) and as motivation, not as an input to the expansion. The two flagged weaknesses are proof gaps rather than circularities: Lemma 2.2 asserts completeness of the eigenfunction family without a full proof, and (5.29) asserts a normalization lower bound without a quantitative derivation; both would need repair for full rigor, but neither assumes the theorem's conclusion. The skeptical concern about the regime ε < β/ν, which in the critical scaling β = Kε is exactly K > ν, is a genuine scope limitation on the claimed sharp transition, but it is a correctness and completeness concern rather than a circular reduction. Therefore the appropriate circularity score is 0.

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

The central claim rests on standard perturbation-theory machinery and on two unproved analytic assertions about the eigenfunctions and normalization of M_{ν,ε,β}. No free parameters are fitted to data and no new physical entities are introduced. The rotation parameter β and viscosity ν are inputs from the model, and the critical-scaling ratio K is a chosen asymptotic parameter, not a fitted constant.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The eigenfunctions of M_{ν,ε,β} listed in Lemma 2.2 form a basis of L²(T).
Asserted without proof in Lemma 2.2; needed for the spectral decomposition and Kato reduction in Sections 3-4.
domain assumption The principal eigenvector V_0 = F_{ν,ε,β} - iεν has a uniform positive lower bound, used to control the normalization factor in (5.29).
Stated as 'has the lower bound' in Section 5 without a quantitative proof; if ‖V_0‖ could vanish, the expansion of λ via the Rayleigh quotient (5.8) would be uncontrolled.
standard math Standard results of analytic perturbation theory for closed operators on Hilbert space, including Riesz projections and the Sherman-Morrison formula for rank-one updates.
Invoked throughout Sections 3-5 without proof; these are classical tools from Kato's monograph [22] and the reference [11].
ad hoc to paper The smallness conditions ε(1+β)/ν < δ_U and ε < β/ν are sufficient for uniform resolvent estimates and Neumann series convergence.
These assumptions are imposed by the authors in Theorem 1.1 and Lemma 3.1 rather than derived from the physical problem; they define the validity regime of the theorem and are not justified from first principles.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Long-Wave Stability And Instability Of Periodic Shear Flows For The 2D Navier-Stokes Equations On The $\beta$-Plane." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SZKAQRHJ

@misc{pith2026260806899,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Long-Wave Stability And Instability Of Periodic Shear Flows For The 2D Navier-Stokes Equations On The $\beta$-Plane},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SZKAQRHJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.06899}
}

abstract

We study the spectral stability of periodic shear flows for the two-dimensional Navier--Stokes equations on the $\beta$-plane in the long-wave regime. It is known that non-rotating periodic shear flows are generically unstable to sufficiently long-wave perturbations. We show that planetary rotation can suppress this instability: using a perturbative analysis based on Kato's reduction, we derive an asymptotic expansion for the principal eigenvalue of the linearized operator and obtain an explicit stability criterion in terms of the shear profile, the viscosity, and the Coriolis parameter. Under the critical scaling where the Coriolis effect and the long-wave perturbation are of comparable size, this criterion extends Yudovich's classical long-wave instability threshold to rotating flows and reveals a sharp transition between stability and instability governed by the ratio $K$. These results give a rigorous account of how viscosity, shear, and rotation compete to determine long-wave stability on the $\beta$-plane.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

[10]

Colombo, M

M. Colombo, M. Dolce, R. Montalto and P. Ventura. Long-wave stability and instability of periodic shear flows for the 2D Navier–Stokes equations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.18070v2

work page arXiv
[1]

M. A. H. Al-Jaboori and D. Wirosoetisno. Navier-Stokes equations on theβ-plane.Discrete and Con- tinuous Dynamical Systems - B, 16(3):687–701, 2011

work page 2011
[2]

Arnol’d and L

V. Arnol’d and L. Meshalkin. A. N. Kolmogorov’s seminar on selected problems of analysis (1958/1959). Uspekhi Matematicheskikh Nauk, 15:247–250, 1960

work page 1958
[3]

Bian and E

D. Bian and E. Grenier. Asymptotic behaviour of solutions of linearized Navier-Stokes equations in the long waves regime. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.16938

arXiv
[4]

Bedrossian and N

J. Bedrossian and N. Masmoudi. Inviscid damping and the asymptotic stability of planar shear flows. Publ. Math. IHES, 122:195–300, 2015

work page 2015
[5]

Bedrossian, N

J. Bedrossian, N. Masmoudi and V. Vicol. Enhanced dissipation and inviscid damping in the inviscid limit of the Navier–Stokes equations near the two-dimensional Couette flow.Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 219:1087–1159, 2016

work page 2016
[6]

Bedrossian, P

J. Bedrossian, P. Germain and N. Masmoudi. On the stability threshold for the 3D Couette flow in Sobolev regularity.Annals of Mathematics, 185(2):541–608, 2017

work page 2017
[7]

Boffetta and R

G. Boffetta and R. Ecke. Two-dimensional turbulence.Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, 44:427–451, 2012

work page 2012

Show all 36 references

[8]

Bradshaw

P. Bradshaw. The analogy between streamline curvature and buoyancy in turbulent shear flow.Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 36(1):177–191, 1969

1969
[9]

Chandrasekhar

S. Chandrasekhar. Hydrodynamic and Hydromagnetic Stability. Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, 1981

1981
[11]

C. Deng. A generalization of the Sherman–Morrison–Woodbury formula.Applied Mathematics Letters, 24:1561–1564, 2011

2011
[12]

Drazin and W

P. Drazin and W. Reid. Hydrodynamic Stability. Cambridge Monographs on Mechanics and Applied Mathematics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge–New York, 1981

1981
[13]

Drazin, D

P. Drazin, D. Beaumont and S. Coaker On Rossby waves modified by basic shear, and barotropic instabilityJournal of Fluid Mechanics, 550:1–16, 2006

2006
[14]

Y. Fan, D. Han and Q. Wang. Inertial instability of Couette flow with Coriolis force. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.01602
[15]

Gallagher and L

I. Gallagher and L. Saint-Raymond. On the influence of the Earth’s rotation on geophysical flows. In Handbook of Mathematical Fluid Dynamics, Vol. IV, pages 201–329, 2007

2007
[16]

Grenier, Y

E. Grenier, Y. Guo and T. Nguyen. Spectral instability of characteristic boundary layer flows.Duke Mathematical Journal, 165:3085–3146, 2016

2016
[17]

Grenier, Y

E. Grenier, Y. Guo and T. Nguyen. Spectral instability of general symmetric shear flows in a two- dimensional channel.Advances in Mathematics, 292:52–110, 2016

2016
[18]

Howard, A

M. Howard, A. Statt, H. Stone and T. Truskett. Stability of force-driven shear flows in nonequilibrium molecular simulations with periodic boundaries.The Journal of Chemical Physics, 152, 2020

2020
[19]

Y. Huang. On the classical Bradshaw–Richardson number: Its generalized form, properties, and appli- cation in turbulence.Physics of Fluids, 30(12):125110, 2018

2018
[20]

Huang, Y

W. Huang, Y. Sun and X. Xu. On the Sobolev stability threshold for 3D Navier–Stokes equations with rotation near the Couette flow. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.05104

arXiv
[21]

Huang, Y

W. Huang, Y. Sun and X. Xu. Stability of the Couette flow for 3D Navier–Stokes equations with rotation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.11005

arXiv
[22]

T. Kato. Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators. Springer-Verlag, 1966

1966
[23]

Kobayashi and S

S. Kobayashi and S. Sakai. Barotropic unstable modes in zonal and meridional channel on the beta-plane. Geophysical & Astrophysical Fluid Dynamics, 71:73–103, 1993

1993
[24]

H. Kuo. Dynamic instability of two-dimensional non-divergent flow in a barotropic atmosphere.Journal of Meteorology, 6:105–122, 1949

1949
[25]

M. Li, C. Sun, C. Wang, D. Wei and Z. Zhang. Transition threshold for the 3D Couette flow in Sobolev space. arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.21294, 2025

2025
[26]

Z. Lin, J. Yang and H. Zhu. Barotropic instability of shear flows.Studies in Applied Mathematics, 144:289–326, 2018

2018
[27]

Meshalkin and J

L. Meshalkin and J. Sinai. Investigation of the stability of a stationary solution of a system of equa- tions for the plane movement of an incompressible viscous liquid.Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 25:1700–1705, 1961. LONG-W A VE SHEAR INSTABILITY ON THEβ-PLANE 25

1961
[28]

J. Miles. Baroclinic instability of the zonal wind.Reviews of Geophysics, 2:155–176, 1964

1964
[29]

Pedlosky

J. Pedlosky. Baroclinic instability in two layer systems.Tellus, 15:20–25, 1963

1963
[30]

Pedlosky

J. Pedlosky. The stability of currents in the atmosphere and the ocean, Part I.Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 21:201–219, 1964

1964
[31]

Rayleigh

J. Rayleigh. On the stability, or instability, of certain fluid motions.Proceedings of the London Mathe- matical Society, 9:57–70, 1880
[32]

Wei and Z

D. Wei and Z. Zhang. Transition threshold for the 3D Couette flow in Sobolev space.Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics, 74, 2018

2018
[33]

D. Wei, Z. Zhang and H. Zhu. Linear inviscid damping for theβ-plane equation. arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1809.03065, 2018

2018 arXiv
[34]

L. Wang, Z. Zhang and H. Zhu. Dynamics near Couette flow for theβ-plane equation.Advances in Mathematics, 432:109261, 2023

2023
[35]

Yudovich

V. Yudovich. Instability of parallel flows of a viscous incompressible fluid with respect to perturbations periodic in space.Zh. Vychisl. Mat. i Mat. Fiz., 6:242–249, 1966

1966
[36]

M. C. Zelati, A. D. Zotto and K. Widmayer. On the stability of viscous three-dimensional rotating Couette flow. arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.17735, 2025. Department of Mathematics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA. Email address:mingchen@pitt.edu Department of...

2025 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [10]

Colombo, M

M. Colombo, M. Dolce, R. Montalto and P. Ventura. Long-wave stability and instability of periodic shear flows for the 2D Navier–Stokes equations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.18070v2

work page arXiv

[2] [1]

M. A. H. Al-Jaboori and D. Wirosoetisno. Navier-Stokes equations on theβ-plane.Discrete and Con- tinuous Dynamical Systems - B, 16(3):687–701, 2011

work page 2011

[3] [2]

Arnol’d and L

V. Arnol’d and L. Meshalkin. A. N. Kolmogorov’s seminar on selected problems of analysis (1958/1959). Uspekhi Matematicheskikh Nauk, 15:247–250, 1960

work page 1958

[4] [3]

Bian and E

D. Bian and E. Grenier. Asymptotic behaviour of solutions of linearized Navier-Stokes equations in the long waves regime. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.16938

arXiv

[5] [4]

Bedrossian and N

J. Bedrossian and N. Masmoudi. Inviscid damping and the asymptotic stability of planar shear flows. Publ. Math. IHES, 122:195–300, 2015

work page 2015

[6] [5]

Bedrossian, N

J. Bedrossian, N. Masmoudi and V. Vicol. Enhanced dissipation and inviscid damping in the inviscid limit of the Navier–Stokes equations near the two-dimensional Couette flow.Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 219:1087–1159, 2016

work page 2016

[7] [6]

Bedrossian, P

J. Bedrossian, P. Germain and N. Masmoudi. On the stability threshold for the 3D Couette flow in Sobolev regularity.Annals of Mathematics, 185(2):541–608, 2017

work page 2017

[8] [7]

Boffetta and R

G. Boffetta and R. Ecke. Two-dimensional turbulence.Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, 44:427–451, 2012

work page 2012