Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I think I may have just solved a Millennium Problem. I found an exact 3D solution to Navier-Stokes equations that has a finite time singularity. The velocity, pressure, and force are all spatially periodic. The solution has a time singularity at t=T, where T is greater than zero and less than infinity.

I think it's correct, but I may have overlooked something. I don't have a Phd, but I'm not a complete noob. I have a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering. I posted it on vixra because I'm not endorsed on arxiv. Is the counterexample correct? thanks.

share|cite|improve this question
I haven't read your paper in detail, but (assuming your computations are correct) it seems as though what you've shown is "there exist initial conditions $u_0(x,t)$ and forcing $f(x,t)$ such that there is a solution to the N-S equations with a finite-time singularity" whereas what the problem asks for is "There exist initial conditions $u_0(x,t)$ and forcing $f(x,t)$ for which there exist no solutions satisfying appropriate smoothness and finite energy conditions." That is, you've demonstrated the existence of one bad solution, instead of the non-existence of good solutions. – Chris Taylor Feb 10 '12 at 8:34
As I've understood it it's already been proven by Jean Leray that solutions are unique and smooth for small time according to:… So doesn't that mean that the solution is unique and hence, there is no "good solution" for those initial conditions and forcing function? – A.G. Feb 10 '12 at 12:36
Just send this paper to a reputable journal. – Jon Feb 10 '12 at 14:06
up vote 26 down vote accepted

Nice try! But I think it likely there is no singularity at $t=T$ as you claim. The function $$g(x)=\arctan\left(\frac{\sqrt2}2 \tan x\right)$$ has derivative $$g'(x) = \frac{2\sqrt 2}{3+\cos^2x -\sin^2 x},$$ with no blowup at $x=\pi/2$ as you might think.

A result of Constantin and Fefferman from 1993 shows that if the direction of the vorticity remains smooth (Lipschitz is enough), then a Navier-Stokes solution cannot blow up. This also appears to rule out your solution as a counterexample.

share|cite|improve this answer
Also, good sensible-looking write-up. Most submissions here that say: please check my arxiv/vixra paper, are clearly from cranks. This one is not. – GEdgar Feb 10 '12 at 15:42

protected by Asaf Karagila Jul 13 '13 at 23:33

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.