Serrin–type regularity criteria for the 3D MHD equations via one velocity component and one magnetic component
Abstract.
In this paper, we consider the Cauchy problem to the 3D MHD equations. We show that the Serrin–type conditions imposed on one component of the velocity and one component of magnetic fields with
and imply that the suitable weak solution is regular at . The proof is based on the new local energy estimates introduced by Chae-Wolf (Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 2021) and Wang-Wu-Zhang (arXiv:2005.11906).
Key words: MHD equations; Serrin–type conditions; suitable weak solution; partial regularity; local energy estimates
AMS Subject Classification (2000): 35Q35; 35Q30; 76D03
1. Introduction
We consider the Cauchy problem to the three-dimensional incompressible magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) equations in
(1.1) |
with initial data
(1.2) |
Here and are nondimensional quantities corresponding to the velocity, magnetic fields and a scalar pressure. is the viscosity coefficient and is the resistivity coefficient. We require in this paper.
Such system (1.1)–(1.2) describes many phenomena such as the geomagnetic dynamo in geophysics, solar winds and solar flares in astrophysics. G. Duvaut and J. L. Lions [8] constructed a global weak solution and the local strong solution to the initial boundary value problem, and the properties of such solutions have been examined by M. Sermange and R. Temam in [20].
If the magnetic fields , the system (1.1) degenerates to the incompressible Navier–Stokes equations. A global weak solution to the Navier–Stokes equations was constructed by J. Leray [16]. However, the uniqueness and regularity of such weak solution is still one of the most challenging open problems in the field of mathematical fluid mechanics. One essential work is usually referred as Serrin–type conditions (see [9, 18, 21, 22] and the references therein.), i.e. if the weak solution satisfies
(1.3) |
then the weak solution is regular in . There are several notable results [3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 24] to weaken the above criteria by imposing constraints only on partial components or directional derivatives of velocity field. In particular, D. Chae and J. Wolf [3] made an important progress and obtained the regularity of solution under the condition
(1.4) |
W. Wang, D. Wu and Z. Zhang [24] improved to
(1.5) |
Throughout this paper, denotes the Lorentz space with respect to the time variable.
If the magnetic fields , the situation is more complicated due to the coupling effect between the velocity and the magnetic fields . Some fundamental Serrin–type regularity criteria in term of the velocity only were done in [7, 13, 26, 28]. For instance, if the weak solution satisfies
(1.6) |
then the solution is regular in . More regularity criteria can be found in [12, 27] and the references therein.
We now recall the notion of suitable weak solution to the MHD equations (1.1).
Definition 1.1.
The global existence of suitable weak solution to the MHD equations (1.1) was investigated by C. He and Z. Xin [14]. They also obtained that one-dimensional Hausdorff measure of the possible space-time singular points set for the suitable weak solution is zero.
In this paper, inspired by [3, 24], we focus on the regularity criteria to the MHD equation (1.1) involving the terms and only.
Theorem 1.2.
Let be a suitable weak solution of the MHD equations (1.1) in If satisfies
(1.8) |
and
(1.9) |
with , then the solution is regular at . Here is the ball in with center at origin and radius .
Remark 1.3.
Remark 1.4.
Remark 1.5.
By the standard interpolation theory, it is possible to extend the regularity criteria in Theorem 1.2 to weaker one, such as
(1.12) |
with . We leave the details to the interested readers.
Theorem 1.6.
2. Notations and Preliminary
In this preparation section, we recall some usual notations and preliminary results.
For two comparable quantities, the inequality stands for for some positive constant . The dependence of the constant on other parameters or constants are usually clear from the context, and we will often suppress this dependence.
We use the following standard notations in the literature: Given matrix , we denote the norm ; for two vectors , and are the usual scalar product and norm in respectively, and is a matrix with , ; for , is the horizontal variable; is the ball in with center at and radius , and ; is the ball in the horizontal plane with center at and radius , and ; with and ; we denote the integral mean value .
We also shall use the same notation as that in Chae-Wolf [3]. Set
and
where . We consider given by
which satisfies the fundamental solution of the backward heat equation
There exist absolute constants such that for , it holds
(2.1) |
We denote the energy
The following lemma ensures the energy estimates.
Lemma 2.1.
[3, Lemma 3.1] Let . For , , , we have
(2.2) |
3. A Key Lemma
In this section, we apply a similar argument in Cafferalli-Kohn-Nirenberg [1], Chae-Wolf [3], or Wang-Wu-Zhang [24] to prove the following lemma.
Lemma 3.1.
For fixed , we can pick and . Set
(3.2) |
By Lemma A.5, we have
(3.3) |
Let denotes a cut-off function, , and on .
In addition, let be arbitrarily chosen, but Let with in satisfying
(3.4) |
and
For , denote , where is the indicator function of the set . Let
(3.5) |
Taking the test function in (), we have
(3.6) |
Next, we shall handle the right side of (3) term by term.
3.1. Estimates for nonlinear terms
Lemma 3.2.
Under the assumptions of Lemma 3.1, we have
(3.7) |
Proof.
Proof.
We first note that
(3.9) |
By the estimates (2.1) for , Hölder inequality and Lemma 2.1, we have
(3.10) |
For the second term, by (2.1) and Lemma 2.1 again, we have
(3.11) |
As to , we have
(3.12) |
which is analogous to (3.1), and
(3.13) |
which is analogous to (3.1). Combining (3.1) with (3.1), (3.1), (3.1) and (3.1), we obtain (3.3). ∎∎
3.2. Estimates for the pressure
This part is devoted to the estimates regarding the pressure term on the right side of (3). We will give a similar argument in [24] here.
Given matrix valued function , we set
where the Fourier transform is defined by
Therefore, , defines a bounded linear operator with
(3.14) |
Denote ,
(3.15) |
It follows that
in the sense of distributions and is harmonic in . Then we have
(3.16) |
Lemma 3.4.
Under the assumptions of Lemma 3.1, we have
(3.17) |
3.3. The proof of Lemma 3.1
On the basis of the estimates of the nonlinear term and the pressure in subsection 3.1–3.2, we are in position to give the detail proof of Lemma 3.1.
Proof.
Gathering (3) and the estimates in Lemma 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4, we have
In view of (3.3), there exists a sufficient large integer such that
(3.18) |
Then for we have
(3.19) |
where the constant
As the iteration argument in [10, V. Lemma 3.1], we introduce the sequence which satisfy
with and . For and , we have
(3.20) |
Applying (3.18) and (3.3) to the iteration argument from (3.3), we obtain that for ,
Let , we obtain that for ,
(3.21) |
For , there exists an integer , such that
which together with (3.21) ensures that
For ,
Hence for ,
(3.22) |
By Sobolev embedding theorem, we have that for ,
(3.23) |
The proof is completed.∎∎
4. Proof of Theorem 1.2
Before starting the proof, we give an essential lemma for the 3D MHD equation (1.1).
Lemma 4.1.
Let in the MHD equations (1.1). Assume that is a suitable weak solution in with . Then the solution is regular in .
Proof.
Denote the singular set of the suitable weak solution, the cylinder and . By [14] or [23, Theorem 1.4], we know that the one-dimensional Hausdorff measure of is zero.
Assume that the assertion does not hold, i.e. . By a similar argument in [15, Lemma 3.2], there exists and some with , such that
Without loss of generality, we may assume . Thus, the solution and is singular at . Moreover, there exists a constant , such that
(4.1) |
and for or ,
(4.2) |
We introduce the Elsässer variables and , which satisfy
As in [2], we introduce , where the non-negative cut-off function , on and . It is easy to find that , and
Define , , which satisfy
(4.3) | ||||
(4.4) |
Let be a cut-off function with , on . Multiplying (4.3) by with , and integrating the resulting equations over , applying (4.1), (4.2), Hölder’s inequality and Sobolev embedding theorem, we have
(4.5) |
Analogously, multiplying (4.4) by , and integrating the resulting equations over , we have
(4.6) |
Summing up (4) and (4) and applying Gronwall’s inequality, we have that for all ,
(4.7) |
Accordingly, by (4.2) and (4.7), we have that for ,
We can pick a sufficient small , such that for all ,
By Lemma A.9, we have that the solution is regular at , which leads to a contradiction.∎∎
Now, we are in position to prove Theorem 1.2 by standard rigid methods.
For and , we denote the following scaling
By (3.22), we obtain that for ,
(4.8) |
Applying Lemma 3.1 and Lemma A.6, we obtain that for ,
which implies that
(4.9) |
Moreover, is a suitable weak solution to the MHD equations (1.1) in , which converges weakly (by taking subsequences if needed) to some ,
(4.10) |
By a similar argument as [17, Theorem 2.2], we can prove that is a suitable weak solution to the MHD equations in and strongly in . By (1.8)–(1.9), we have
(4.11) |
By Lemma 4.1, the solution is regular at . If we assume that the solution is singular at , is also singular at . It leads to a contradiction by Lemma A.8.
The proof of Theorem 1.2 is completed.∎
Appendix A
Lemma A.1.
[3, Lemma A.2] Let and be harmonic. Then for all and , we get
(A.1) |
where stands for a positive constant depending only on and .
We will present the estimates of , and , which is defined in (3.2), in the following several lemmas.
Lemma A.2.
Under the assumptions of Lemma 3.1, we have
(A.2) |
Proof.
Lemma A.3.
Under the assumptions of Lemma 3.1, we have
(A.7) |
Proof.
Lemma A.4.
Under the assumptions of Lemma 3.1, we have
(A.12) |
Proof.
Lemma A.5.
For the sake of simplicity, we define
(A.18) | |||
(A.19) |
Lemma A.6.
Let solve in the sense of distributions. If there exists a constant such that for all ,
(A.20) |
then for some and all ,
(A.21) |
Proof.
We claim that for ,
(A.22) |
Actually, we write , where and
(A.23) |
is harmonic in and the mean value property of implies that
(A.24) |
Lemma A.7.
[23, Theorem 1.1] There exists an absolute constant with the following property. If is a suitable weak solution to the MHD equations in satisfying that for some , and
(A.27) |
then the solution is regular at .
Lemma A.8 (stability of singularities).
Let be a sequence of suitable weak solutions to the MHD equations (1.1) in such that in , in . Assume is singular at , as . Then is singular at .
Proof.
The proof is similar with [19, Lemma 2.1]. If is regular at , then there exists and for all ,
(A.28) |
Since is singular at , by (A.18) and Lemma A.7, we have that for all ,
(A.29) |
For sufficient large and all , we have and
(A.30) |
Denote and . For all , we have
(A.31) |
By (A.28), we have that for all ,
(A.32) |
Applying an analogous argument in Lemma A.6, we have that for all with ,
(A.33) |
Accordingly, we have for all ,
(A.34) |
where the constant is independent of and . It leads to a contradiction if we let and then . The proof is completed. ∎∎
Acknowledgments
Hui Chen was supported by Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province(LQ19A010002). Chenyin Qian was supported by Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province(LY20A010017). Ting Zhang was in part supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (11771389, 11931010, 11621101).
References
- [1] L. Caffarelli, R. Kohn, and L. Nirenberg. Partial regularity of suitable weak solutions of the Navier–Stokes equations. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 35(6):771–831, 1982.
- [2] C. Cao and E. S. Titi. Global well-posedness of the three-dimensional viscous Primitive equations of large scale ocean and atmosphere dynamics. Ann. of Math., 166(1):245–267, 2007.
- [3] D. Chae and J. Wolf. On the Serrin-type condition on one velocity component for the Navier–Stokes equations. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 2021.
- [4] J.-Y. Chemin and P. Zhang. On the critical one component regularity for 3–D Navier–Stokes system. Ann. Sci. Éc. Norm. Supér., 49(1):131–167, 2016.
- [5] J.-Y. Chemin, P. Zhang, and Z. Zhang. On the critical one component regularity for 3–D Navier–Stokes system: general case. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 224(3):871–905, 2017.
- [6] H. Chen, D. Fang, and T. Zhang. Critical regularity criteria for Navier–Stokes equations in terms of one directional derivative of the velocity. Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 44(6):5123–5132, 2020.
- [7] Q. Chen, C. Miao, and Z. Zhang. On the regularity criterion of weak solution for the 3D viscous magneto–hydrodynamics equations. Comm. Math. Phys., 284(3):919–930, 2008.
- [8] G. Duvaut and J. L. Lions. Inéquations en thermoélasticité et magnétohydrodynamique. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 46(4):241–279, 1972.
- [9] L. Escauriaza, G. A. Seregin, and V. Šverák. Backward uniqueness for parabolic equations. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 169(2):147–157, 2003.
- [10] M. Giaquinta. Multiple integrals in the calculus of variations and nonlinear elliptic systems, volume 105 of Annals of Mathematics Studies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1983.
- [11] B. Han, Z. Lei, D. Li, and N. Zhao. Sharp one component regularity for Navier–Stokes. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 231(2):939–970, 2019.
- [12] B. Han and N. Zhao. On the critical blow up criterion with one velocity component for 3D incompressible MHD system. Nonlinear Anal. Real World Appl., 51, 2020.
- [13] C. He and Z. Xin. On the regularity of weak solutions to the magnetohydrodynamic equations. J. Differ. Equ., 213(2):235–254, 2005.
- [14] C. He and Z. Xin. Partial regularity of suitable weak solutions to the incompressible magnetohydrodynamic equations. J. Funct. Anal., 227(1):113–152, 2005.
- [15] I. Kukavica, W. Rusin, and M. Ziane. An anisotropic partial regularity criterion for the Navier–Stokes equations. J. Math. Fluid Mech., 19(1):123–133, 2017.
- [16] J. Leray. Sur le mouvement d’un liquide visqueux emplissant l’espace. Acta Math., 63(1):193–248, 1934.
- [17] F. Lin. A new proof of the Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg theorem. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 51(3):241–257, 1998.
- [18] G. Prodi. Un teorema di unicità per le equazioni di Navier–Stokes. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl., 48(1):173–182, 1959.
- [19] W. Rusin and V. Šverák. Minimal initial data for potential Navier–Stokes singularities. J. Funct. Anal., 260(3):879–891, 2011.
- [20] M. Sermange and R. Temam. Some mathematical questions related to the MHD equations. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 36(5):635–664, 1983.
- [21] J. Serrin. On the interior regularity of weak solutions of the Navier–Stokes equations. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 9(1):187–195, 1962.
- [22] S. Takahashi. On interior regularity criteria for weak solutions of the Navier–Stokes equations. Manuscr. Math., 69(3):237–254, 1990.
- [23] V. Vyalov. Partial regularity of solutions to the magnetohydrodynamic equations. J. Math. Sci., 150(1):1771–1786, 2008.
- [24] W. Wang, D. Wu, and Z. Zhang. Scaling invariant Serrin criterion via one velocity component for the Navier–Stokes equations. eprint arXiv:2005.11906, 2020.
- [25] W. Wang and Z. Zhang. On the interior regularity criteria for suitable weak solutions of the magnetohydrodynamics equations. SIAM J. Math. Anal., 45(5):2666–2677, 2013.
- [26] Y. Wang. BMO and the regularity criterion for weak solutions to the magnetohydrodynamic equations. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 328(2):1082–1086, 2007.
- [27] Z. Zhang. Remarks on the global regularity criteria for the 3D MHD equations via two components. Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 66(3):977–987, 2015.
- [28] Y. Zhou. Remarks on regularities for the 3D MHD equations. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst., 12(5):881–886, 2005.