text:
# Long-time asymptotics of the Navier-Stokes and vorticity equations on ℝ³

## 1 Introduction

We consider the motion of an incompressible viscous fluid filling the whole space $`^3`$. If no external force is applied, the velocity $`𝐮(x,t)`$ of the fluid satisfies the Navier-Stokes equation

$$_t𝐮+(𝐮)𝐮=\nu \mathrm{\Delta }𝐮\frac{1}{\rho }p,div𝐮=0,$$
(1)
where $`\rho `$ is the density of the fluid, $`\nu `$ is the kinematic viscosity, and $`p(x,t)`$ is the pressure field. Replacing $`x,t,𝐮,p`$ with the dimensionless quantities

$$\frac{x}{L},\frac{\nu t}{L^2},\frac{L𝐮}{\nu },\frac{L^2p}{\rho \nu ^2},$$

where $`L`$ is an arbitrary length scale, Eq.(1) is transformed into

$$_t𝐮+(𝐮)𝐮=\mathrm{\Delta }𝐮p,div𝐮=0.$$
(2)
Since the length $`L`$ was arbitrary, Eq.(2) is still invariant under the scaling transformation

$$𝐮(x,t)\lambda 𝐮(\lambda x,\lambda ^2t),p(x,t)\lambda ^2p(\lambda x,\lambda ^2t),$$
(3)
for any $`\lambda >0`$.

As no external force is applied, it is intuitively clear that all finite-energy solutions of (2) should converge, as time goes to infinity, to the rest state $`𝐮0`$, $`p\mathrm{const}`$. As a matter of fact, if $`𝐮(x,t)`$ is any global weak solution in $`L^2(^3)`$ satisfying the energy inequality, it is known that $`𝐮(,t)_{L^2}0`$ as $`t\mathrm{}`$ (see Wiegner ). Moreover, if

$$\mathrm{e}^{t\mathrm{\Delta }}𝐮(,0)_{L^2}\frac{C}{(1+t)^\alpha },t0,$$
(4)
for some $`\alpha 0`$, then

$$𝐮(,t)_{L^2}\frac{C^{}}{(1+t)^\beta },t0,$$
(5)
where $`\beta =\mathrm{min}(\alpha ,5/4)`$. This result shows that the solutions of (2) decay to zero at the same rate as those of the linear heat equation, provided this rate does not exceed $`t^{5/4}`$. As we shall see below, the restriction $`\beta 5/4`$ in (5) is due to the nonlinearity in (2) and to the incompressibility condition $`div𝐮=0`$.

Wiegner’s result raises a very natural question: can we characterize the set of solutions of (2) such that $`t^{5/4}𝐮(,t)_{L^2}0`$ as $`t\mathrm{}`$? Put differently, given a solution $`𝐮(x,t)`$ satisfying (5) with $`\beta =5/4`$, under which conditions can we prove the corresponding lower bound $`𝐮(,t)_{L^2}C(1+t)^{5/4}`$? This problem has been intensively studied during the last 15 years, especially by M.E. Schonbek , , , , who found sufficient conditions for such a lower bound to hold. For technical reasons, these results were established assuming some additional decay of the initial data $`𝐮_0=𝐮(,0)`$. Typically, it was assumed that $`𝐮_0L^2(^3)^3`$ and $`(1+|x|)𝐮_0L^1(^3)^3`$, so that (4) holds with $`\alpha =5/4`$.

Very recently, T. Miyakawa and M.E. Schonbek obtained an interesting characterization of the “rapidly decreasing” solutions of the Navier-Stokes equation in $`^N`$, $`N2`$. In the case $`N=3`$, their result reads:

###### Theorem 1.1

 Assume that $`𝐮_0L^2(^3)^3`$, $`div𝐮_0=0`$, and $`(1+|x|)𝐮_0L^1(^3)^3`$. Let $`𝐮(x,t)`$ be a global weak solution of (2) with initial data $`𝐮(,0)=𝐮_0`$, satisfying the bound (5) with $`\beta =5/4`$. For all $`k,\mathrm{}\{1,2,3\}`$, define

$$b_k\mathrm{}=_^3x_ku_{\mathrm{}}(x,0)dx,c_k\mathrm{}=_0^{\mathrm{}}_^3u_k(x,t)u_{\mathrm{}}(x,t)dxdt.$$
(6)
Then

$$\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}t^{5/4}𝐮(,t)_{L^2}=0$$
(7)
if and only if there exists $`c0`$ such that

$$b_k\mathrm{}=0\text{and }c_k\mathrm{}=c\delta _k\mathrm{},k,\mathrm{}\{1,2,3\}.$$
(8)
The proof is a direct calculation using the integral equation satisfied by the solutions of (2). As the authors themselves remark, this argument does not provide much intuition as to the meaning of the conditions (8). From our point of view, the most surprising feature of Theorem 1.1 is the fact that assertion (7) is translation invariant in time, whereas conditions (8) are not. More precisely, if a solution $`𝐮(x,t)`$ satisfies (7), so does $`𝐮(x,t+T)`$ for any $`T>0`$. However, the property that $`(1+|x|)𝐮`$ be integrable is not preserved under the Navier-Stokes evolution (even for strong solutions, where uniqueness holds). Thus, if $`(1+|x|)𝐮_0L^1(^3)^3`$, then in general $`(1+|x|)𝐮(,T)L^1(^3)^3`$ for $`T>0`$, so that the moments $`b_k\mathrm{}`$ do not make sense if $`𝐮(x,0)`$ is replaced by $`𝐮(x,T)`$. Moreover, if the matrix $`(c_k\mathrm{})`$ is scalar, this property will be lost if $`𝐮(x,t)`$ is replaced by $`𝐮(x,t+T)`$. Summarizing, Theorem 1.1 is a characterization of those rapidly decreasing solutions of (2) whose initial data lie in the noninvariant subspace $`\{𝐮_0L^2(^3)^3|(1+|x|)𝐮_0L^1(^3)^3\}`$. Nontrivial examples of such solutions have been recently constructed by L. Brandolese .

In this paper, we use the vorticity formulation to study the long-time behavior of the solutions of the Navier-Stokes equation (2). Setting $`𝝎=rot𝐮`$, Eq.(2) is transformed into

$$_t𝝎+(𝐮)𝝎(𝝎)𝐮=\mathrm{\Delta }𝝎,div𝝎=0.$$
(9)
The velocity field $`𝐮`$ can be reconstructed from $`𝝎`$ via the Biot-Savart law:

$$𝐮(x)=\frac{1}{4\pi }_^3\frac{(xy)𝝎(y)}{|xy|^3}dy,x^3,$$
(10)
where $``$ denotes the cross product in $`^3`$. Although (2) and (9) are formally equivalent, we believe that using the vorticity formulation to compute the long-time asymptotics has a crucial advantage: roughly speaking, the spatial decay of $`𝝎`$ is preserved under the evolution defined by (9). For instance, if $`(1+|x|)^m𝝎_0L^2(^3)^3`$ for some $`m0`$, then (9) has a unique local solution $`𝝎(x,t)`$ with initial data $`𝝎_0`$ satisfying $`(1+|x|)^m𝝎(,t)L^2(^3)^3`$ whenever it exists. Again, we point out that this property does not hold for the velocity field $`𝐮(x,t)`$ if $`m5/2`$. This is the reason why the integrability condition $`(1+|x|)𝐮L^1(^3)^3`$ is not preserved under evolution.

In the sequel, we always assume that the vorticity $`𝝎(x,t)`$ is small and decreases sufficiently fast as $`|x|\mathrm{}`$. The smallness assumption is not a restriction as far as the long-time behavior is concerned, since all global solutions of the Navier-Stokes equation (in the energy space) converge to zero as $`t\mathrm{}`$. Moreover, this hypothesis allows to deal with global strong solutions of (9). On the other hand, assuming that the vorticity decreases rapidly as $`|x|\mathrm{}`$ is very reasonable from a physical point of view. This is the case, for instance, if the initial data are created by stirring the fluid with a (finite size) tool. In addition, this property is very helpful to study the long-time asymptotics, since in parabolic equations the spatial and temporal behaviors of the solutions are intimately connected.

To actually compute the asymptotics, we express the vorticity $`𝝎(x,t)`$ in terms of the self-similar variables $`(\xi ,\tau )`$ defined by $`\xi =x/\sqrt{1+t}`$, $`\tau =\mathrm{log}(1+t)`$, see (18) below. Although the transformation is time-dependent, the rescaled vorticity $`𝐰(\xi ,\tau )`$ still satisfies an autonomous equation, as a consequence of the scaling invariance (3). Linearizing this equation around the origin $`𝐰=0`$, we find that the generator $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of the time evolution has a countable set of real, isolated eigenvalues with finite multiplicities, and that the essential spectrum can be pushed arbitrarily far away into the left-half plane by choosing the function space (i.e., the spatial decay of the vorticity) appropriately. Thus, the long-time asymptotics in a neighborhood of the origin are determined, at any prescribed order, by a finite system of ordinary differential equations.

This reduction procedure, or some variant of it, has been often applied to investigate the long-time behavior of solutions of nonlinear parabolic or damped hyperbolic equations , , , , , , , , , . In the context of the Navier-Stokes equation, rescaling techniques were used by A. Carpio ,  to study the vorticity equations in two and three dimensions. In , M. Cannone and F. Planchon constructed a large family of self-similar solutions of the three-dimensional Navier-Stokes equation. These solutions correspond to fixed points of our rescaled vorticity equation, but do not belong to the function spaces we use, because they decay too slowly as $`|x|\mathrm{}`$. In a companion paper , we follow the procedure outlined above to study the solutions of the two-dimensional Navier-Stokes and vorticity equations. In addition, we exploit the fact that the spectrum of the generator $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is discrete to construct finite-dimensional invariant manifolds that are approached, at a prescribed rate, by all solutions in a neighborhood of the origin.

The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we prove the existence of global solutions of the vorticity equation (9) in a neighborhood of the origin, and we estimate their decay rate as $`t\mathrm{}`$. The results we obtain are comparable to those of M. Wiegner in . Section 3 is devoted to the first order asymptotics. Under appropriate conditions, we show that

$$𝝎(x,t)\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\frac{b_i}{(1+t)^2}𝐟_i\left(\frac{x}{\sqrt{1+t}}\right),t\mathrm{},$$

where $`𝐟_1,𝐟_2,𝐟_3`$ are explicit divergence-free vector fields with Gaussian decay at infinity, and $`b_1,b_2,b_3`$ are real coefficients which can be computed from the initial data. Using (10), a similar result can be obtained for the velocity field $`𝐮(x,t)`$. In Section 4, we give a higher order asymptotic expansion of $`𝝎(x,t)`$, including terms of the form $`(1+t)^{5/2}𝐠(x/\sqrt{1+t})`$. This result is used in Section 5 to characterize the set of solutions $`𝝎(x,t)`$ of (9) for which the velocity field $`𝐮(x,t)`$ satisfies (7). It is shown that these solutions lie on a smooth invariant manifold of finite codimension, which is tangent at the origin to a spectral subspace of the generator $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Intersecting this manifold with the (noninvariant) subspace $`\{𝐮_0L^2(^3)^3|(1+|x|)𝐮_0L^1(^3)^3\}`$, we recover exactly conditions (8) in Theorem 1.1. Finally, Appendix A describes the spectral properties of the generator $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and Appendix B collects various estimates of the velocity field $`𝐮`$ in terms of the vorticity $`𝝎`$ in weighted Lebesgue spaces.

Notation. Throughout the paper, we use boldface letters for vector-valued functions, such as $`𝐮(x,t)`$ and $`𝝎(x,t)`$. However, to avoid a proliferation of boldface symbols, we use standard italic characters for vector variables, such as $`x=(x_1,x_2,x_3)`$. In both cases, $`||`$ denotes the Euclidean norm in $`^3`$: $`|𝐮|=(u_1^2+u_2^2+u_3^2)^{1/2}`$, $`|x|=(x_1^2+x_2^2+x_3^2)^{1/2}`$. For any $`p[1,\mathrm{}]`$, we denote by $`|f|_p`$ the norm of a function $`f`$ in the Lebesgue space $`L^p(^3)`$. If $`𝐟L^p(^3)^3`$, we set $`|𝐟|_p=𝐟_p`$. Weighted norms play a very important role in this paper. We always denote by $`\rho :^3`$ the weight function defined by $`\rho (x)=1+|x|`$. For any $`m0`$, we set $`f_m=|\rho ^mf|_2`$, and $`𝐟_m=|\rho ^m𝐟|_2`$. If $`fC^0([0,T],L^p(^3))`$, we often write $`f(,t)`$ or simply $`f(t)`$ to denote the map $`xf(x,t)`$. Finally, we denote by $`C`$ a generic positive constant, which may differ from place to place, even in the same chain of inequalities.

Acknowledgements. Part of this work was done when C.E.W. visited the University of Paris-Sud and Th.G. the Department of Mathematics and Center for BioDynamics of Boston University. The hospitality of both institutions is gratefully acknowledged. We also thank L. Brandolese, I. Gallagher, A. Mielke, G. Raugel, J.-C. Saut, and M. Vishik for stimulating discussions. We are especially indebted to A. Mielke for bringing to our attention the work of , which triggered our interest in this problem. The research of C.E.W. is supported in part by the NSF under grant DMS-9803164.

## 2 The Cauchy problem for the vorticity equation

The aim of this section is to prove the existence of global solutions of the vorticity equation for small initial data in weighted Lebesgue spaces. We first recall a few standard estimates for the velocity field $`𝐮`$ in terms of the associated vorticity $`𝝎=rot𝐮`$. Further estimates in weighted spaces can be found in Appendix B.

###### Lemma 2.1

Let $`𝐮`$ be the velocity field obtained from $`𝛚`$ via the Biot-Savart law (10).
(a) Assume that $`1<p<q<\mathrm{}`$ and $`\frac{1}{q}=\frac{1}{p}\frac{1}{3}`$. If $`𝛚L^p(^3)^3`$, then $`𝐮L^q(^3)^3`$, and there exists $`C>0`$ such that

$$|𝐮|_qC|𝝎|_p.$$
(11)
(b) Assume that $`1p<3<q\mathrm{}`$, and define $`\alpha (0,1)`$ by the relation $`\frac{1}{3}=\frac{\alpha }{p}+\frac{1\alpha }{q}`$. If $`𝛚L^p(^3)^3L^q(^3)^3`$, then $`𝐮L^{\mathrm{}}(^3)^3`$, and there exists $`C>0`$ such that

$$|𝐮|_{\mathrm{}}C|𝝎|_p^\alpha |𝝎|_q^{1\alpha }.$$
(12)
(c) Assume that $`1<p<\mathrm{}`$. If $`𝛚L^p(^3)^3`$, then $`𝐮L^p(^3)^9`$ and there exists $`C>0`$ such that

$$|𝐮|_pC|𝝎|_p.$$
(13)
In addition, $`div𝐮=0`$ and, if $`div𝛚=0`$, then $`rot𝐮=𝛚`$.

Proof: Part (a) is a direct consequence of (10) and of the Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality, see for instance Stein , Theorem V.1. To prove (b), assume that $`𝝎0`$, and let $`R=(|\omega |_p/|\omega |_q)^\beta `$, where $`\beta =\frac{\alpha }{13/q}=\frac{1\alpha }{3/p1}`$. Using Hölder’s inequality, we find

$`|𝐮(x)|`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle _{|y|R}}|𝝎(xy)|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{|y|^2}}dy+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle _{|y|R}}|𝝎(xy)|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{|y|^2}}dy`$
$``$ $`C|𝝎|_qR^{1\frac{3}{q}}+C|𝝎|_p{\displaystyle \frac{1}{R^{\frac{3}{p}1}}}2C|𝝎|_p^\alpha |𝝎|_q^{1\alpha }.`$
Finally, $`𝐮`$ is obtained from $`𝝎`$ via a singular integral kernel of Calderón-Zygmund type, hence (13) follows from Theorem II.3 in .  QED

In the sequel, for any $`p[1,\mathrm{}]`$, we denote by $`\mathrm{L}^p(^3)`$ the function space

$$\mathrm{L}^p(^3)=\left\{𝐟L^p(^3)^3\right|div𝐟=0\},$$
(14)
equipped with the same norm as $`L^p(^3)^3`$. As is well-known, the $`L^3`$-norm of the velocity field $`𝐮(x,t)`$ is invariant under the scaling transformation (3). For the vorticity $`𝝎(x,t)`$, the corresponding critical space is $`\mathrm{L}^{3/2}(^3)`$. The following result shows that the Cauchy problem for (9) is globally well-posed for small initial data in $`\mathrm{L}^{3/2}(^3)`$.

###### Theorem 2.2

There exists $`ϵ_0>0`$ such that, for all initial data $`𝛚_0\mathrm{L}^{3/2}(^3)`$ with $`|𝛚_0|_{3/2}ϵ_0`$, (9) has a unique solution $`𝛚C^0([0,\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^{3/2}(^3))C^0((0,\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^{\mathrm{}}(^3))`$ satisfying $`𝛚(0)=𝛚_0`$. Moreover, for all $`p[\frac{3}{2},+\mathrm{}]`$, there exists $`C_p>0`$ such that

$$|𝝎(t)|_p\frac{C_p|𝝎_0|_{3/2}}{t^{1\frac{3}{2p}}},t>0.$$
(15)
Finally, if $`𝐮(x,t)`$ is the velocity field obtained from $`𝛚(x,t)`$ via the Biot-Savart law (10), then $`𝐮(,t)\mathrm{L}^q(^3)`$ for all $`q[3,+\mathrm{}]`$ if $`t>0`$, and there exists $`C_q>0`$ such that

$$|𝐮(t)|_q\frac{C_q|𝝎_0|_{3/2}}{t^{\frac{1}{2}\frac{3}{2q}}},t>0.$$
(16)
Proof: The proof of Theorem 2.2 follows exactly the argument of Kato  which shows that the Navier-Stokes equation has global solutions for small initial data in $`\mathrm{L}^3(^3)`$. The same argument also shows that the Cauchy problem for (9) is locally well-posed in $`\mathrm{L}^{3/2}(^3)`$, without smallness assumption on the data. More generally, one can prove that (9) has global solutions for small data in the Morrey space $`M^{3/2}(^3)`$, see .

Following , we now introduce the “scaling variables”

$$\xi =\frac{x}{\sqrt{1+t}},\tau =\mathrm{log}(1+t).$$
(17)
If $`𝝎(x,t)`$ is a solution of (9) and if $`𝐮(x,t)`$ is the corresponding velocity field, we set

$`𝝎(x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+t}}𝐰({\displaystyle \frac{x}{\sqrt{1+t}}},\mathrm{log}(1+t)),`$ (18)
$`𝐮(x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+t}}}𝐯({\displaystyle \frac{x}{\sqrt{1+t}}},\mathrm{log}(1+t)).`$ (19)
Then the rescaled vorticity $`𝐰(\xi ,\tau )`$ satisfies the evolution equation

$$_\tau 𝐰=\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐰(𝐯)𝐰+(𝐰)𝐯,div𝐰=0,$$
(20)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the differential operator

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Delta }_\xi +\frac{1}{2}\xi _\xi +1,\xi ^3.$$
(21)
The rescaled velocity $`𝐯`$ is reconstructed from $`𝐰`$ via the Biot-Savart law:

$$𝐯(\xi )=\frac{1}{4\pi }_^3\frac{(\xi \eta )𝐰(\eta )}{|\xi \eta |^3}d\eta .$$
(22)
As in the two-dimensional case , we shall solve the rescaled vorticity equation in weighted $`L^2`$ spaces. For any $`m0`$, we define

$$L^2(m)=\left\{fL^2(^3)\right|f_m<\mathrm{}\},$$
(23)
where

$$f_m=\left(_^3(1+|\xi |)^{2m}|f(\xi )|^2d\xi \right)^{1/2}=|\rho ^mf|_2.$$

Here and in the sequel, we denote by $`\rho `$ the weight function $`\rho (\xi )=1+|\xi |`$. In analogy with (14), we introduce the space of divergence free vector fields

$$\mathrm{L}^2(m)=\{𝐟L^2(m)^3|div𝐟=0\},$$
(24)
equipped with the norm $`𝐟_m=|\rho ^m|𝐟||_2`$, where $`|𝐟|=(f_1^2+f_2^2+f_3^2)^{1/2}`$.

In Appendix A, we show that the operator $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup $`\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ in $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$, for any $`m0`$. Since $`_i\mathrm{\Lambda }=(\mathrm{\Lambda }+\frac{1}{2})_i`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$ (where $`_i=_{\xi _i}`$), it is clear that $`_i\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}=\mathrm{e}^{\frac{\tau }{2}}\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}_i`$ for all $`\tau 0`$. Thus, using the fact that $`div𝐯=div𝐰=0`$, we can rewrite (20) in integral form as follows:

$$w_i(\tau )=\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}w_i(0)+\underset{j=1}{\overset{3}{}}_0^\tau _j\mathrm{e}^{(\tau s)(\mathrm{\Lambda }\frac{1}{2})}\left(w_j(s)v_i(s)v_j(s)w_i(s)\right)\mathrm{d}s,$$
(25)
where $`i=1,2,3`$. The main result of this section states that, if the initial data are small, (25) has global solutions in $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ which decay exponentially to zero as $`\tau +\mathrm{}`$.

###### Theorem 2.3

Let $`0<\mu 1`$ and $`m>2\mu +\frac{1}{2}`$. There exists $`r_0>0`$ such that, for all initial data $`𝐰_0\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ with $`𝐰_0_mr_0`$, equation (25) has a unique global solution $`𝐰C^0([0,\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$ satisfying $`𝐰(0)=𝐰_0`$. In addition, there exists $`K_01`$ such that

$$𝐰(\tau )_mK_0\mathrm{e}^{\mu \tau }𝐰_0_m,\tau 0.$$
(26)
Proof: Given $`𝐰_0\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$, we shall solve (25) in the Banach space

$$X=\left\{𝐰C^0([0,+\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^2(m))\right|𝐰_X=\underset{\tau 0}{sup}𝐰(\tau )_m\mathrm{e}^{\mu \tau }<\mathrm{}\}.$$

We first note that $`\tau \mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}𝐰_0X`$; namely, there exists $`C_11`$ such that

$$\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}𝐰_0_mC_1\mathrm{e}^{\mu \tau }𝐰_0_m,\tau 0.$$
(27)
Indeed, if $`m\frac{5}{2}`$, (27) is nothing but (62) with $`ϵ=m2\mu \frac{1}{2}`$, $`\alpha =0`$, and $`n=1`$ or $`0`$. If $`m>\frac{5}{2}`$, (27) follows from (63) with $`\alpha =0`$ and $`n=0`$.

Next, given $`𝐰C^0([0,+\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$, we define $`𝐅[𝐰]C^0([0,+\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$ by

$$(F_i[𝐰])(\tau )=\underset{j=1}{\overset{3}{}}_0^\tau _j\mathrm{e}^{(\tau s)(\mathrm{\Lambda }\frac{1}{2})}\left(w_j(s)v_i(s)v_j(s)w_i(s)\right)\mathrm{d}s,\tau 0.$$
(28)
We shall prove that $`𝐅`$ maps $`X`$ into $`X`$, and that there exists $`C_2>0`$ such that

$$𝐅[𝐰]_XC_2𝐰_X^2,𝐅[𝐰]𝐅[\stackrel{~}{𝐰}]_XC_2𝐰\stackrel{~}{𝐰}_X(𝐰_X+\stackrel{~}{𝐰}_X),$$
(29)
for all $`𝐰,\stackrel{~}{𝐰}X`$. As is easily verified, the bounds (27), (29) imply that the map $`𝐰\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}𝐰_0+𝐅[𝐰]`$ has a unique fixed point in the ball $`\{𝐰X|𝐰_XR\}`$ if $`R<(2C_2)^1`$ and $`𝐰_0_m(2C_1)^1R`$. Using Gronwall’s lemma, it is then straightforward to show that this fixed point is actually the unique solution of (25) in the space $`C^0([0,+\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$. Finally, since $`𝐰_XC_1𝐰_0_m+C_2𝐰_X^2C_1𝐰_0_m+\frac{1}{2}𝐰_X`$, the bound (26) holds with $`K_0=2C_1`$.

To prove (29), we use the following estimate, which is a consequence of Propositions A.3 and A.4. Assume that $`f:^3`$ satisfies $`\rho ^mfL^{3/2}(^3)`$, where $`\rho (\xi )=1+|\xi |`$. Then there exists $`C_3>0`$ such that, for $`j=1,2,3`$,

$$_j\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}f_mC_3\frac{\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau }}{a(\tau )^{3/4}}|\rho ^mf|_{3/2},\tau >0,$$
(30)
where $`a(\tau )=1\mathrm{e}^\tau `$ and $`\nu =\mathrm{min}(\mu ,\frac{1}{2})`$. Indeed, if $`0<\tau <2`$, then (30) follows from (64) with $`p=2`$ and $`q=3/2`$. If $`\tau 2`$, we have

$$_j\mathrm{e}^{(\tau 1)\mathrm{\Lambda }}\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{\Lambda }f_mC\mathrm{e}^{\nu (\tau 1)}\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{\Lambda }f_mC^{}\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau }|\rho ^mf|_{3/2},$$
(31)
where the second inequality is again a consequence of (64). The first inequality in (31) follows from (62) with $`ϵ=m2\mu \frac{1}{2}`$ and $`n=1`$ if $`m3/2`$, and from (63) with $`n=1`$ if $`m>3/2`$. This proves (30) for all $`\tau >0`$.

Given $`𝐰X`$ and $`s0`$, we apply (30) to $`f=w_j(s)v_i(s)v_j(s)w_i(s)`$, where $`i,j\{1,2,3\}`$ and $`𝐯=(v_1,v_2,v_3)`$ is the velocity field obtained from $`𝐰`$ via the Biot-Savart law. Using Hölder’s inequality and Lemma 2.1, we can bound

$$|\rho ^mw_jv_i|_{3/2}|\rho ^mw_j|_2|v_i|_6Cw_j_m|w_i|_2Cw_j_mw_i_m,$$
(32)
so that $`|\rho ^mf|_{3/2}C_4𝐰(s)_m^2`$ for some $`C_4>0`$. Combining this bound with (30) and using (28), we obtain, for all $`\tau >0`$,

$`F_i([𝐰])(\tau )_m`$ $``$ $`3C_3C_4{\displaystyle _0^\tau }{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{e}^{(\nu +\frac{1}{2})(\tau s)}}{a(\tau s)^{3/4}}}𝐰(s)_m^2ds`$
$``$ $`3C_3C_4𝐰_X^2{\displaystyle _0^\tau }{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{e}^{(\nu +\frac{1}{2})(\tau s)}}{a(\tau s)^{3/4}}}\mathrm{e}^{2\mu s}dsC_2𝐰_X^2\mathrm{e}^{\mu \tau },`$
since $`\nu +\frac{1}{2}\mu `$. This establishes the first inequality in (29), and the second one can be proved along the same lines. The proof of Theorem 2.3 is now complete.  QED

Since the semigroup $`\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ is not analytic in $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$, the solution $`𝐰`$ given by Theorem 2.3 is in general not a smooth function of $`\tau `$. In particular, $`\tau 𝐰(\tau )C^1((0,+\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$, so that $`𝐰`$ is not a classical solution of (20) in $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$. Nevertheless, following the common use, we shall often refer to $`𝐰`$ as to the (mild) solution of (20) in $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$. Remark that the evolution defined by (20) is regularizing in the sense that $`𝐰(\xi ,\tau )`$ is a smooth function of $`\xi ^3`$ for any $`\tau >0`$. This property is well-known, and will not be proved here. We only quote the following result:

###### Proposition 2.4

Let $`0<\mu 1`$, $`m>2\mu +\frac{1}{2}`$, and let $`𝐰C^0([0,\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$ be the solution of (20) given by Theorem 2.3. There exists $`K_1>0`$ such that, for all $`p[2,+\mathrm{}]`$,

$$|\rho ^m𝐰(\tau )|_pK_1(1+\tau ^{\gamma _p})\mathrm{e}^{\mu \tau }𝐰_0_m,\tau >0,$$
(33)
where $`\rho (\xi )=1+|\xi |`$ and $`\gamma _p=\frac{3}{2}(\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{p})`$.

Proof: In view of (26), it is clearly sufficient to prove (33) for $`0<\tau 1`$. This can be done by a standard bootstrap argument, using Proposition A.4, Lemma 2.1, and the integral equation (25) satisfied by $`𝐰`$. We omit the details.  QED

###### Corollary 2.5

Let $`0<\mu 1`$ and $`m>2\mu +\frac{1}{2}`$. Let $`𝐰C^0([0,\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$ be the solution of (20) given by Theorem 2.3, and let $`𝐯`$ be the corresponding velocity field. There exists $`K_2>0`$ such that, for all $`\tau 1`$,

$$|𝐰(\tau )|_pK_2\mathrm{e}^{\mu \tau }𝐰_0_m\text{for all }\{\begin{array}{cc}p(p_m,\mathrm{}]\hfill & \text{if }\frac{1}{2}<m\frac{3}{2}\text{ ,}\hfill \\ p[1,\mathrm{}]\hfill & \text{if }m>\frac{3}{2}\text{ ,}\hfill \end{array}$$
(34)
and

$$|𝐯(\tau )|_qK_2\mathrm{e}^{\mu \tau }𝐰_0_m\text{for all }\{\begin{array}{cc}q(q_m,\mathrm{}]\hfill & \text{if }\frac{1}{2}<m\frac{5}{2}\text{ ,}\hfill \\ q(1,\mathrm{}]\hfill & \text{if }m>\frac{5}{2}\text{ ,}\hfill \end{array}$$
(35)
where $`p_m=\frac{6}{3+2m}`$ and $`q_m=\frac{6}{1+2m}`$. Moreover, the bounds (34), (35) hold for all $`\tau 0`$ if $`p2`$, $`q6`$.

Proof: If $`p>2`$, (34) is a direct consequence of (33). If $`p_m<p2`$, then $`|𝐰|_pC|\rho ^m𝐰|_2`$ by Hölder’s inequality, and (34) again follows from (33). Using (34) and Lemma 2.1, we easily obtain (35) if $`q>3/2`$. Finally, if $`m>3/2`$ and $`\mathrm{max}(1,q_m)<q3/2`$, we can pick $`n<\mathrm{min}(m,5/2)`$ such that $`q>q_n`$. Using Hölder’s inequality and Proposition B.1, we find $`|𝐯|_qC|\rho ^n𝐯|_6C|\rho ^n𝐰|_2C𝐰_m`$, and (35) follows.  QED

###### Remark 2.6

The fact that the value $`q=1`$ is excluded in (35) if $`m>\frac{5}{2}`$ is not a technical restriction. As is shown in Corollary B.4, the velocity field $`𝐯(\xi ,\tau )`$ is not integrable in this case, unless $`_^3\xi _iw_j(\xi ,\tau )d\xi =0`$ for all $`i,j\{1,2,3\}`$.

For the vorticity $`𝝎(x,t)`$ and the velocity $`𝐮(x,t)`$ in the original variables, Corollary 2.5 implies, for the same values of $`p`$ and $`q`$:

$$|𝝎(t)|_pK_2t^{1\mu +\frac{3}{2p}}𝝎_0_m,|𝐮(t)|_qK_2t^{\frac{1}{2}\mu +\frac{3}{2q}}𝝎_0_m,t1.$$

We now explain our motivation for introducing the scaling variables (17). As is shown in Appendix A, the spectrum of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ acting on $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ can be decomposed as $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Lambda })=\sigma _d(\mathrm{\Lambda })\sigma _c(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$, where

$$\sigma _d(\mathrm{\Lambda })=\left\{\frac{k+1}{2}\right|k^{}\},\sigma _c(\mathrm{\Lambda })=\left\{\lambda \right|\mathrm{}(\lambda )\frac{1}{4}\frac{m}{2}\}.$$

(See Fig. 1.) Remark that the discrete spectrum $`\sigma _d(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ does not depend on $`m`$, whereas the continuous spectrum $`\sigma _c(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ can be shifted arbitrarily far away from the origin by choosing $`m`$ appropriately. Therefore, if $`m0`$ is sufficiently large, the long-time behavior of the solutions of (20) in a neighborhood of the origin is governed by a finite system of ordinary differential equations. This system is obtained by projecting (20) onto the finite-dimensional subspace of $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ spanned by the eigenfunctions of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ corresponding to the first eigenvalues $`\lambda _k=\frac{k+1}{2}`$, with $`k=1,2,\mathrm{},k_0`$.

A rigorous justification of this reduction, using invariant manifold theory, can be found in  for the two-dimensional vorticity equation. Specifically, given any $`\nu >0`$, we prove the existence of a finite-dimensional locally invariant manifold, which is tangent at the origin to the spectral subspace corresponding to the first eigenvalues of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and which is approached at a rate $`𝒪(\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau })`$ or faster by any solution of (20) that stays in a neighborhood of the origin for all times. This method allows, at least in principle, to compute the long-time asymptotics of the solutions to arbitrarily high order by studying a finite-dimensional dynamical system – the restriction of the rescaled vorticity equation to the manifold.

Invariant manifolds can be constructed in the three-dimensional case also, and we use them in our discussion of the set of solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations which decay “faster than expected” in Section 5. However, for computing the asymptotics, we show that one can also use a different approach. Given $`k_0^{}`$ and $`m>k_0+\frac{3}{2}`$, we decompose any solution $`𝐰`$ of (20) in $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ as

$$𝐰(\xi ,\tau )=\underset{k=1}{\overset{k_0}{}}\underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{k(k+2)}{}}\alpha _k\mathrm{}(\tau )𝐰_k\mathrm{}(\xi )+𝐑(\xi ,\tau ),$$

where $`\alpha _k\mathrm{}`$ and, for any $`k\{1,\mathrm{},k_0\}`$, $`\{𝐰_k\mathrm{}|\mathrm{}=1,\mathrm{},k(k+2)\}`$ is a basis of the eigenspace $`\{𝐰\mathrm{L}^2(m)|\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐰=\frac{k+1}{2}𝐰\}`$. Using this decomposition, (20) becomes a system of ordinary differential equations for the coefficients $`\alpha _k\mathrm{}`$ coupled to a partial differential equation for the remainder $`𝐑`$. A direct analysis of this system allows to compute the asymptotics up to order $`𝒪(\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau })`$, where $`\nu =\mathrm{min}(\frac{k_0+2}{2},\frac{m}{2}\frac{1}{4})`$. This program is carried out in Section 3 for $`k_0=1`$ (first order asymptotics) and in Section 4 for $`k_0=2`$ (second order asymptotics).

## 3 First-order asymptotics

In this section, we consider the behavior of the solutions of (20) in $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ with $`\frac{5}{2}<m\frac{7}{2}`$. In this space, the discrete spectrum of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ consists of a single isolated eigenvalue $`\lambda _1=1`$, of multiplicity $`3`$. A convenient basis of eigenvectors is given by $`\{𝐟_1,𝐟_2,𝐟_3\}`$, where $`𝐟_i=rot(G𝐞_i)`$. Here and in the sequel, $`G`$ is the Gaussian function

$$G(\xi )=\frac{1}{(4\pi )^{3/2}}\mathrm{e}^{|\xi |^2/4},\xi ^3,$$

and $`\{𝐞_1,𝐞_2,𝐞_3\}`$ denotes the canonical basis of $`^3`$. A short calculation shows that $`𝐟_i=𝐩_iG`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$, where $`𝐩_i(\xi )=\frac{1}{2}(𝐞_i\xi )`$. Explicitly,

$$𝐩_1(\xi )=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ \xi _3\\ \xi _2\end{array}\right),𝐩_2(\xi )=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi _3\\ 0\\ \xi _1\end{array}\right),𝐩_3(\xi )=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi _2\\ \xi _1\\ 0\end{array}\right).$$
(36)
The vector fields $`𝐩_i`$ satisfy $`div𝐩_i=0`$ and $`rot𝐩_i=𝐞_i`$. Integrating by parts, we thus find

$$_^3𝐩_i𝐟_jd\xi =_^3rot(𝐩_i)(G𝐞_j)\mathrm{d}\xi =(𝐞_i𝐞_j)_^3Gd\xi =\delta _{ij}.$$

Moreover, if $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}=\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{1}{2}(\xi )\frac{1}{2}`$ is the formal adjoint of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, it is easy to verify that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}𝐩_i=𝐩_i`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$. The velocity fields $`𝐯^{𝐟_i}`$ corresponding to $`𝐟_i`$ are computed in Appendix B. In particular, we mention that $`|𝐯^{𝐟_i}(\xi )||\xi |^3`$ as $`|\xi |\mathrm{}`$, so that $`𝐯^{𝐟_i}\mathrm{L}^q(^3)`$ for all $`q>1`$. Using these notations, any solution $`𝐰`$ of (20) in $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ can be decomposed as

$$𝐰(\xi ,\tau )=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\beta _i(\tau )𝐟_i(\xi )+𝐑(\xi ,\tau ),$$
(37)
where

$$\beta _i(\tau )=_^3𝐩_i(\xi )𝐰(\xi ,\tau )d\xi ,i=1,2,3.$$
(38)
Then $`𝐑(,\tau )`$ belongs to the subspace $`𝒲_1`$ of $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ defined in (61), which is also the spectral subspace associated with the continuous spectrum $`\{\lambda |\mathrm{}(\lambda )\frac{1}{4}\frac{m}{2}\}`$ of the operator $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. As in the two-dimensional case , the coefficients $`\beta _i`$ obey a linear evolution equation:

###### Lemma 3.1

Assume that $`m>\frac{5}{2}`$, and let $`𝐰C^0([0,T],\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$ be a solution of (20). Then the coefficients $`\beta _i`$ defined by (38) satisfy, for all $`\tau [0,T]`$,

$$\dot{\beta }_i(\tau )=\beta _i(\tau ),i=1,2,3.$$

Proof: Since $`rot(𝐯𝐰)=(𝐰)𝐯(𝐯)𝐰`$, (20) is equivalent to

$$_\tau 𝐰=\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐰+rot(𝐯𝐰),div𝐰=0.$$

Differentiating (38) formally with respect to $`\tau `$ and integrating by parts, we thus find

$$\dot{\beta }_i=_^3𝐩_i\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐰+rot(𝐯𝐰)\right)d\xi =\beta _i+_^3𝐞_i(𝐯𝐰)d\xi ,$$
(39)
where we used the fact that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}𝐩_i=𝐩_i`$. Since the right-hand side of (39) belongs to $`C^0([0,T])`$ and depends continuously on $`𝐰`$, the calculations above can be justified by a density argument. In particular, $`\beta _iC^1([0,T])`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$. Finally, using the identity $`𝐯𝐰=𝐯rot𝐯=\frac{1}{2}|𝐯|^2(𝐯)𝐯`$ and the fact that $`div𝐯=0`$, we see that the last integral in (39) vanishes, hence $`\dot{\beta }_i=\beta _i`$.  QED

In particular, it follows from Lemma 3.1 that the subspace $`𝒲_1`$ is invariant under the evolution defined by (20). The remainder $`𝐑`$ in (37) satisfies the equation

$$_\tau 𝐑=\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐑+Q_1\left((𝐰)𝐯(𝐯)𝐰\right),div𝐑=0,$$

where $`Q_1:\mathrm{L}^2(m)𝒲_1`$ is the spectral projection (for the operator $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) onto the subspace $`𝒲_1`$. Explicitly,

$$Q_1𝐰=𝐰\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\left(_^3𝐩_i𝐰d\xi \right)𝐟_i.$$

The following result describes the first order asymptotics of $`𝐰(\tau )`$ as $`\tau \mathrm{}`$.

###### Theorem 3.2

Let $`1<\nu \frac{3}{2}`$, $`m>2\nu +\frac{1}{2}`$, and let $`𝐰C^0([0,\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$ be the solution of (20) given by Theorem 2.3 with $`\mu =1`$. Then there exists $`K_31`$ such that

$$𝐰(\tau )\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}b_i\mathrm{e}^\tau 𝐟_i_mK_3\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau }𝐰_0_m,\tau 0,$$

where $`b_i=_^3𝐩_i𝐰_0d\xi `$, $`i=1,2,3`$.

Proof: If $`𝐰C^0([0,\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$ is the solution of (20) given by Theorem 2.3 and $`𝐯`$ the corresponding velocity field, we define $`\beta _i`$ and $`𝐑`$ by (37), (38). By Lemma 3.1, $`\beta _i(\tau )=b_i\mathrm{e}^\tau `$ for $`i=1,2,3`$. To bound the remainder $`𝐑`$, we use the integral equation

$$𝐑(\tau )=\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}𝐑_0+_0^\tau Q_1𝚽(\tau s,𝐰(s),𝐯(s))ds,$$
(40)
where $`𝐑_0=Q_1𝐰_0`$ and $`𝚽(\sigma ,𝐰,𝐯)=\mathrm{e}^{\sigma \mathrm{\Lambda }}((𝐰)𝐯(𝐯)𝐰)`$.

By Proposition A.3, there exists $`C_1>0`$ such that

$$\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}𝐑_0_mC_1\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau }𝐰_0_m,\tau 0.$$
(41)
Indeed, if $`\frac{5}{2}<m\frac{7}{2}`$, (41) is a consequence of (62) with $`\alpha =0`$, $`n=1`$, and $`ϵ=m2\nu \frac{1}{2}`$. If $`m>\frac{7}{2}`$, (41) follows from (63) with $`\alpha =0`$ and $`n=1`$.

To estimate the integral in (40), we proceed as in the proof of Theorem 2.3. Exchanging $``$ with $`\mathrm{e}^{\sigma \mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, we can write $`𝚽=(\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_2,\mathrm{\Phi }_3)`$, where

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_i(\sigma ,𝐰,𝐯)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{3}{}}_j\mathrm{e}^{\sigma (\mathrm{\Lambda }\frac{1}{2})}(w_jv_iv_jw_i),i=1,2,3,$$

see (25). By (30), (32), there exists $`C_2>0`$ such that $`Q_1𝚽(\sigma ,𝐰,𝐯)_mC_2\sigma ^{3/4}𝐰_m^2`$ for all $`\sigma [0,1]`$. Using (41) and (26), we thus find

$$𝐑(\tau )_mC_1𝐰_0_m+_0^\tau C_2(\tau s)^{3/4}(K_0𝐰_0_m)^2dsC𝐰_0_m,$$

for all $`\tau [0,1]`$. (Here and in the sequel, we use the fact that $`𝐰_0_mr_0`$, see Theorem 2.3.) If $`\tau >1`$, we write $`𝐑(\tau )=\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}𝐑_0+𝐑_1(\tau )+𝐑_2(\tau )`$, where

$`𝐑_1(\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\tau 1}}\mathrm{e}^{(\tau 1s)\mathrm{\Lambda }}Q_1𝚽(1,𝐰(s),𝐯(s))ds,`$
$`𝐑_2(\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{\tau 1}^\tau }Q_1𝚽(\tau s,𝐰(s),𝐯(s))ds.`$
Proceeding as above, we obtain

$`𝐑_1(\tau )_m`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\tau 1}}C_1\mathrm{e}^{\nu (\tau 1s)}C_2(K_0\mathrm{e}^s𝐰_0_m)^2dsC\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau }𝐰_0_m^2,`$
$`𝐑_2(\tau )_m`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle _{\tau 1}^\tau }C_2(\tau s)^{3/4}(K_0\mathrm{e}^s𝐰_0_m)^2dsC\mathrm{e}^{2\tau }𝐰_0_m^2.`$
Thus, there exists $`K_3>0`$ such that $`𝐑(\tau )_mK_3\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau }𝐰_0_m`$, for all $`\tau 0`$.  QED

###### Corollary 3.3

Let $`1<\nu \frac{3}{2}`$ and $`m>2\nu +\frac{1}{2}`$. Let $`𝐰C^0([0,\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$ be the solution of (20) given by Theorem 2.3 with $`\mu =1`$, and let $`𝐯`$ be the corresponding velocity field. There exists $`K_4>0`$ such that, for all $`\tau 1`$,

$`\left|𝐰(\tau ){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}b_i\mathrm{e}^\tau 𝐟_i\right|_pK_4\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau }𝐰_0_m,1p\mathrm{},`$ (42)
$`\left|𝐯(\tau ){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}b_i\mathrm{e}^\tau 𝐯^{𝐟_i}\right|_qK_4\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau }𝐰_0_m,1q\mathrm{},`$ (43)
where $`𝐯^{𝐟_i}`$ is given by (68). Moreover, the bounds (42), (43) hold for all $`\tau 0`$ if $`p2`$, $`q6`$.

Proof: Using the analogue of Proposition 2.4 for $`𝐑(\xi ,\tau )`$ and proceeding as in the proof of Corollary 2.5, we obtain (42) for $`1p\mathrm{}`$ and (43) for $`1<q\mathrm{}`$. To prove (43) for $`q=1`$, we pick $`n`$ such that $`5/2<n<\mathrm{min}(m,7/2)`$. If $`𝐯^𝐑`$ is the velocity field obtained from $`𝐑`$ via the Biot-Savart law (22), then using Hölder’s inequality and Proposition B.1 we can bound $`|𝐯^𝐑|_1C|\rho ^n𝐯^𝐑|_6C|\rho ^n𝐑|_2C𝐑_m`$, and the result follows.  QED

In terms of the original variables, Corollary 3.3 shows that, for all $`t1`$,

$`|𝝎(t)𝝎_{app}(t)|_pCt^{1\nu +\frac{3}{2p}}𝝎_0_m,1p\mathrm{},`$
$`|𝐮(t)𝐮_{app}(t)|_qCt^{\frac{1}{2}\nu +\frac{3}{2q}}𝝎_0_m,1q\mathrm{},`$
where $`𝝎_{app}(x,t)`$, $`𝐮_{app}(x,t)`$ are the self-similar vector fields defined by

$$𝝎_{app}(x,t)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\frac{b_i}{(1+t)^2}𝐟_i\left(\frac{x}{\sqrt{1+t}}\right),𝐮_{app}(x,t)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\frac{b_i}{(1+t)^{3/2}}𝐯^{𝐟_i}\left(\frac{x}{\sqrt{1+t}}\right).$$

Remark that $`𝐮_{app}(,t)\mathrm{L}^1(^3)`$, unless $`b_1=b_2=b_3=0`$.

## 4 Second-order asymptotics

We now turn our attention to the solutions of (20) in $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ with $`\frac{7}{2}<m\frac{9}{2}`$. Acting on this space, the operator $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ has exactly two isolated eigenvalues: $`\lambda _1=1`$ (of multiplicity $`3`$) and $`\lambda _2=\frac{3}{2}`$ (of multiplicity $`8`$). Let $`_2`$ be the subspace of $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ spanned by the eigenfunctions corresponding to $`\lambda _2`$, see Appendix A. A convenient basis of $`_2`$ is provided by the vector fields $`𝐠_i`$ and $`𝐡_{ij}`$, which we now define.

a) For $`i=1,2,3`$, let $`𝐠_i=rot𝐟_i=rot(𝐩_iG)=\frac{G}{4}((4|\xi |^2)𝐞_i+\xi _i\xi )`$. Explicitly,

$$𝐠_1=\frac{G}{4}\left(\begin{array}{c}4\xi _2^2\xi _3^3\\ \xi _1\xi _2\\ \xi _1\xi _3\end{array}\right),𝐠_2=\frac{G}{4}\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi _1\xi _2\\ 4\xi _1^2\xi _3^2\\ \xi _2\xi _3\end{array}\right),𝐠_3=\frac{G}{4}\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi _1\xi _3\\ \xi _2\xi _3\\ 4\xi _1^2\xi _2^2\end{array}\right).$$
(44)
Then $`div𝐠_i=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐠_i=\frac{3}{2}𝐠_i`$. By construction, the velocity field associated to $`𝐠_i`$ is $`𝐯^{𝐠_i}𝐟_i`$. In particular, $`𝐯^{𝐠_i}`$ has a Gaussian decay as $`|\xi |\mathrm{}`$. We also define

$$𝐪_1(\xi )=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{c}2\xi _1^2\\ \xi _1\xi _2\\ \xi _1\xi _3\end{array}\right),𝐪_2(\xi )=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi _1\xi _2\\ 2\xi _2^2\\ \xi _2\xi _3\end{array}\right),𝐪_3(\xi )=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi _1\xi _3\\ \xi _2\xi _3\\ 2\xi _3^2\end{array}\right).$$
(45)
Then $`div𝐪_i=0`$, $`rot𝐪_i=𝐩_i`$, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}𝐪_i=\frac{3}{2}𝐪_i`$. It follows that

$$_^3𝐪_i𝐠_jd\xi =_^3rot(𝐪_i)𝐟_j\mathrm{d}\xi =_^3𝐩_i𝐟_jd\xi =\delta _{ij}.$$

b) For $`(ij)S=\{(11),(12),(13),(22),(23)\}`$, we define $`𝐡_{ij}=_i𝐟_j+_j𝐟_i`$. Explicitly, we have $`𝐡_{ii}=\xi _i𝐟_i`$ for $`i=1,2`$ and

$$𝐡_{12}=\frac{G}{4}\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi _1\xi _3\\ \xi _2\xi _3\\ \xi _1^2\xi _2^2\end{array}\right),𝐡_{13}=\frac{G}{4}\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi _1\xi _2\\ \xi _3^2\xi _1^2\\ \xi _2\xi _3\end{array}\right),𝐡_{23}=\frac{G}{4}\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi _2^2\xi _3^2\\ \xi _1\xi _2\\ \xi _1\xi _3\end{array}\right).$$
(46)
Then $`div𝐡_{ij}=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐡_{ij}=\frac{3}{2}𝐡_{ij}`$ for all $`(ij)S`$. The velocity fields $`𝐯^{𝐡_{ij}}`$ corresponding to $`𝐡_{ij}`$ are computed in Appendix B. In particular, we remark that $`|𝐯^{𝐡_{ij}}(\xi )||\xi |^4`$ as $`|\xi |\mathrm{}`$, so that $`\rho 𝐯^{𝐡_{ij}}L^1(^3)^3`$. We also define $`𝐫_{11}=\frac{1}{2}\xi _1\xi _3𝐞_2`$, $`𝐫_{22}=\frac{1}{2}\xi _2\xi _3𝐞_1`$, and

$$𝐫_{12}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi _1\xi _3\\ \xi _2\xi _3\\ 0\end{array}\right),𝐫_{13}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi _1\xi _2\\ 0\\ \xi _2\xi _3\end{array}\right),𝐫_{23}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ \xi _1\xi _2\\ \xi _1\xi _3\end{array}\right).$$
(47)
Then $`div𝐫_{ij}=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}𝐫_{ij}=\frac{3}{2}𝐫_{ij}`$ for all $`(ij)S`$. A direct calculation shows that the following orthogonality relations are satisfied:

$$_^3𝐫_{ij}𝐡_{kl}d\xi =\delta _{ik}\delta _{jl},_^3𝐫_{ij}𝐠_kd\xi =_^3𝐪_k𝐡_{ij}d\xi =0.$$

Using these notations, any solution $`𝐰`$ of (20) in $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ can be decomposed as

$$𝐰(\xi ,\tau )=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\beta _i(\tau )𝐟_i(\xi )+\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\gamma _i(\tau )𝐠_i(\xi )+\underset{(ij)S}{}\zeta _{ij}(\tau )𝐡_{ij}(\xi )+𝐑(\xi ,\tau ),$$
(48)
where $`\beta _i(\tau )`$ is given by (38) and

$$\gamma _i(\tau )=_^3𝐪_i(\xi )𝐰(\xi ,\tau )d\xi ,\zeta _{ij}(\tau )=_^3𝐫_{ij}(\xi )𝐰(\xi ,\tau )d\xi .$$
(49)
Then $`𝐑(,\tau )`$ belongs to the subspace $`𝒲_2`$ of $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ defined in (61), which coincides with the spectral subspace associated with the continuous spectrum $`\{\lambda |\mathrm{}(\lambda )\frac{1}{4}\frac{m}{2}\}`$ of the operator $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The coefficients $`\gamma _i`$ and $`\zeta _{ij}`$ satisfy the following evolution equations:

###### Lemma 4.1

Assume that $`m>\frac{7}{2}`$, and let $`𝐰C^0([0,T],\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$ be a solution of (20). Then the coefficients $`\gamma _i`$, $`\zeta _{ij}`$ defined by (49) satisfy, for all $`\tau [0,T]`$,

$`\dot{\gamma }_i(\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\gamma _i(\tau ),i=1,2,3,`$
$`\dot{\zeta }_{ii}(\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\zeta _{ii}(\tau )+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _^3}(v_3(\xi ,\tau )^2v_i(\xi ,\tau )^2)d\xi ,i=1,2,`$ (50)
$`\dot{\zeta }_{ij}(\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\zeta _{ij}(\tau ){\displaystyle _^3}v_i(\xi ,\tau )v_j(\xi ,\tau )d\xi ,1i<j3,`$
where $`𝐯=(v_1,v_2,v_3)`$ is the velocity field obtained from $`𝐰`$ via the Biot-Savart law (22).

Proof: We proceed as in the proof of Lemma 3.1. Differentiating (49) and integrating by parts, we find

$`\dot{\gamma }_i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _^3}𝐪_i\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐰+rot(𝐯𝐰)\right)d\xi ={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\gamma _i+{\displaystyle _^3}𝐩_i\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|𝐯|^2(𝐯)𝐯\right)d\xi `$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\gamma _i+{\displaystyle _^3}𝐯\left((𝐯)𝐩_i\right)d\xi ={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\gamma _i,`$
because $`(𝐯)𝐩_i=\frac{1}{2}𝐞_i𝐯𝐯`$. Similarly, for all $`(ij)S`$, we find

$$\dot{\zeta }_{ij}=\frac{3}{2}\zeta _{ij}+_^3𝐯\left((𝐯)rot𝐫_{ij}\right)d\xi .$$

But $`rot𝐫_{ii}=\frac{1}{2}(\xi _3𝐞_3\xi _i𝐞_i)`$ and $`rot𝐫_{ij}=\frac{1}{2}(\xi _i𝐞_j+\xi _j𝐞_i)`$ for $`ij`$, hence

$$𝐯\left((𝐯)rot𝐫_{ii}\right)=\frac{1}{2}(v_3^2v_i^2),𝐯\left((𝐯)rot𝐫_{ij}\right)=v_iv_j(ij).$$

This concludes the proof.  QED

The remainder $`𝐑`$ in (48) satisfies the equation

$$_\tau 𝐑=\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐑+Q_2\left((𝐰)𝐯(𝐯)𝐰\right),div𝐑=0,$$

where $`Q_2:\mathrm{L}^2(m)𝒲_2`$ is the spectral projection (for the operator $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) onto the subspace $`𝒲_2`$, see Appendix A. Our next result describes the second order asymptotics of $`𝐰(\tau )`$ as $`\tau \mathrm{}`$.

###### Theorem 4.2

Let $`\frac{3}{2}<\nu <2`$, $`m>2\nu +\frac{1}{2}`$, and let $`𝐰C^0([0,\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$ be the solution of (20) given by Theorem 2.3 with $`\mu =1`$. Then there exist constants $`b_i`$, $`c_i`$, $`d_{ij}`$, and $`K_5`$ such that $`𝐰(\tau )𝐰_{app}(\tau )_mK_5\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau }𝐰_0_m`$ for all $`\tau 0`$, where

$$𝐰_{app}(\xi ,\tau )=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}b_i\mathrm{e}^\tau 𝐟_i(\xi )+\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}c_i\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}\tau }𝐠_i(\xi )+\underset{(ij)S}{}d_{ij}\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}\tau }𝐡_{ij}(\xi ).$$
(51)
Proof: If $`𝐰C^0([0,\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$ is the solution of (20) given by Theorem 2.3 and $`𝐯`$ is the corresponding velocity field, we define $`\beta _i`$, $`\gamma _i`$, $`\zeta _{ij}`$, and $`𝐑`$ by (38), (48), (49). It is clear that $`\beta _i(\tau )=b_i\mathrm{e}^\tau `$ and $`\gamma _i(\tau )=c_i\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}\tau }`$, where

$$b_i=_^3𝐩_i(\xi )𝐰_0(\xi )d\xi ,c_i=_^3𝐪_i(\xi )𝐰_0(\xi )d\xi ,i=1,2,3.$$

By Corollary 2.5, there exists $`C_1>0`$ such that $`|𝐯(\tau )|_2C_1\mathrm{e}^\tau 𝐰_0_m`$ for all $`\tau 0`$. Thus, it follows easily from Lemma 4.1 that $`|\zeta _{ij}(\tau )d_{ij}\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}\tau }|C_2\mathrm{e}^{2\tau }𝐰_0_m^2`$ for all $`\tau 0`$, where

$`d_{ii}`$ $`=`$ $`\zeta _{ii}(0)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}\tau }{\displaystyle _^3}(v_3(\xi ,\tau )^2v_i(\xi ,\tau )^2)d\xi d\tau ,i=1,2,`$ (52)
$`d_{ij}`$ $`=`$ $`\zeta _{ij}(0){\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}\tau }{\displaystyle _^3}v_i(\xi ,\tau )v_j(\xi ,\tau )d\xi d\tau ,1i<j3.`$
To bound the remainder $`𝐑`$, we proceed exactly as in the proof of Theorem 3.2. By Proposition A.3, there exists $`C_3>0`$ such that $`\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}𝐑_0_mC_3\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau }𝐰_0_m`$ for all $`\tau 0`$. Using the integral equation

$$𝐑(\tau )=\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}𝐑_0+_0^\tau Q_2𝚽(\tau s,𝐰(s),𝐯(s))ds,$$

together with the bound $`𝐰(\tau )_mK_0\mathrm{e}^\tau 𝐰_0_m`$ given by Theorem 2.3, it is easy to show that $`𝐑(\tau )_mC_4\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau }𝐰_0_m`$ for all $`\tau 0`$.  QED

###### Corollary 4.3

Let $`\frac{3}{2}<\nu <2`$ and $`m>2\nu +\frac{1}{2}`$. Let $`𝐰C^0([0,\mathrm{}),\mathrm{L}^2(m))`$ be the solution of (20) given by Theorem 2.3 with $`\mu =1`$, and let $`𝐯`$ be the corresponding velocity field. There exists $`K_6>0`$ such that, for all $`\tau 1`$,

$`|𝐰(\tau )𝐰_{app}(\tau )|_pK_6\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau }𝐰_0_m,1p\mathrm{},`$ (53)
$`|𝐯(\tau )𝐯_{app}(\tau )|_qK_6\mathrm{e}^{\nu \tau }𝐰_0_m,1q\mathrm{},`$ (54)
where

$$𝐯_{app}(\xi ,\tau )=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}b_i\mathrm{e}^\tau 𝐯^{𝐟_i}(\xi )+\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}c_i\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}\tau }𝐯^{𝐠_i}(\xi )+\underset{(ij)S}{}d_{ij}\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}\tau }𝐯^{𝐡_{ij}}(\xi ).$$

Moreover, the bounds (53), (54) hold for all $`\tau 0`$ if $`p2`$, $`q6`$.

In terms of the original variables, Corollary 4.3 shows that, for all $`t1`$,

$`|𝝎(t)𝝎_{app}(t)|_pCt^{1\nu +\frac{3}{2p}}𝝎_0_m,1p\mathrm{},`$
$`|𝐮(t)𝐮_{app}(t)|_qCt^{\frac{1}{2}\nu +\frac{3}{2q}}𝝎_0_m,1q\mathrm{},`$ (55)
where $`𝝎_{app}(x,t)`$, $`𝐮_{app}(x,t)`$ are the self-similar vector fields given by

$`𝝎_{app}(x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+t}}𝐰_{app}({\displaystyle \frac{x}{\sqrt{1+t}}},\mathrm{log}(1+t)),`$
$`𝐮_{app}(x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+t}}}𝐯_{app}({\displaystyle \frac{x}{\sqrt{1+t}}},\mathrm{log}(1+t)).`$ (56)
###### Remark 4.4

In contrast with the two-dimensional case, the second order asymptotic expansions of $`𝛚(x,t)`$ and $`𝐮(x,t)`$ contain only integer powers of $`(1+t)^{1/2}`$, and not resonant terms of the form $`(1+t)^\alpha \mathrm{log}(1+t)`$. However, following , one can show that such logarithmic terms do appear in the third order asymptotics. This is the reason why the case $`\nu =2`$ is excluded in Theorem 4.2. In fact, if $`m>9/2`$, the proof of Theorem 4.2 yields the estimate

$$𝐰(\tau )𝐰_{app}(\tau )_mK_5(1+\tau )\mathrm{e}^{2\tau }𝐰_0_m,\tau 0,$$

which appears to be optimal.

Two prior papers which discuss the second order asymptotics of solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations are those of Carpio, , and Fujigaki and Miyakawa, . As we demonstrate below, the results of Corollary 4.3 extend the results of these two references. The extension results from the fact that by imposing decay conditions on the initial velocity field (see the hypotheses of Theorem 0.6 in  and equation (1.2) of ) certain terms in the approximating velocity field $`𝐮_{app}`$ are forced to be zero. Thus, certain solutions of (2) of finite energy (i.e. of finite $`L^2`$ norm) whose asymptotics Corollary 4.3 allows us to compute are excluded from consideration by the decay conditions of  and . This is a further reason that we feel it is more natural to impose decay conditions on the vorticity rather than the velocity. Note that in deriving the higher-order asymptotics in  (Theorem 2.2 (ii)) increasingly stringent decay conditions are imposed on the velocity which results in more and more terms in the asymptotics being zero. To compare the results of Corollary 4.3 with those of the previous references, first note that the requirement that $`(1+|x|)𝐯_0L^1(^3)^3`$ implies that that $`b_i=0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$ by Corollary B.4. Furthermore, by Corollary B.5, the remaining coefficients in $`𝐯_{app}`$ satisfy

$$c_1=b_{23},c_2=b_{31},c_3=b_{12},$$

and

$$d_{11}=\frac{1}{2}(c_{33}c_{11}),d_{22}=\frac{1}{2}(c_{33}c_{22}),d_{12}=c_{12},d_{23}=c_{23},d_{13}=c_{13},$$

where $`b_k\mathrm{}`$ and $`c_k\mathrm{}`$ are defined in (6). The expressions above for $`d_{ij}`$ follow easily from (19), (52) if one remembers that $`\zeta _{ij}(0)=0`$ by Corollary B.5.

Now consider the term $`𝐀(\xi )=_{j=1}^3c_j𝐯^{𝐠_j}(\xi )`$, in $`𝐯_{app}`$. Since $`𝐯^{𝐠_j}=𝐟_j=\frac{1}{2}(𝐞_j\xi )G`$, where $`G(\xi )=(4\pi )^{3/2}\mathrm{exp}(|\xi |^2/4)`$, this sum can be rewritten as

$$𝐀(\xi )=\frac{1}{2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{3}{}}c_j(𝐞_j\xi )G(\xi )=\frac{1}{2}G(\xi )(𝐜\xi ),$$

where $`𝐜=(c_1,c_2,c_3)`$. Examining this expression component-by-component, we see that

$$A_1(\xi )=\frac{1}{2}G(\xi )(c_2\xi _3c_3\xi _2)=\frac{1}{2}G(\xi )(b_{31}\xi _3b_{12}\xi _2)=(b_{31}_3G+b_{21}_2G),$$

using the anti-symmetry of the $`b_{jk}`$. The other components are treated in like fashion and we find

$$A_j(\xi )=\underset{k=1}{\overset{3}{}}b_{kj}_kG(\xi ),j=1,2,3.$$

To treat the term $`𝐁(\xi )=_{(ij)S}d_{ij}𝐯^{𝐡_{ij}}(\xi )`$, we note that using the expressions for $`𝐯^{𝐡_{ij}}`$ in Appendix B, one has

$$𝐯^{𝐡_{ij}}=2_i_j(\mathrm{\Phi })+(_iG)𝐞_j+(_jG)𝐞_i,$$

where $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }=G`$. Then using the expressions for $`d_{ij}`$ from above a straightforward computation shows that

$$𝐁(\xi )=\underset{i,j=1}{\overset{3}{}}c_{ij}\left(_i_j(\mathrm{\Phi })+(_iG)𝐞_j\right).$$

In , the following notation is introduced:

$$E_t(x)=\frac{1}{t^{3/2}}G\left(\frac{x}{\sqrt{t}}\right),F_{\mathrm{},jk}(x,t)=\frac{1}{t^2}F_{\mathrm{},jk}(\frac{x}{\sqrt{t}},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}),x^3,t>0,$$

where $`F_{\mathrm{},jk}(,1)=_k_{\mathrm{}}(_j\mathrm{\Phi })+(_{\mathrm{}}G)\delta _{jk}`$. Using (56) and the expressions above for $`𝐀(\xi )`$ and $`𝐁(\xi )`$, it is easy to verify that the velocity field $`𝐮_{app}`$ in (55) satisfies

$$𝐞_j𝐮_{app}(x,t1)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{3}{}}b_{kj}_kE_t(x)\underset{k,\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{3}{}}c_k\mathrm{}F_{\mathrm{},jk}(x,t),j=1,2,3.$$

Thus, written in terms of this notation, Corollary 4.3 implies:

###### Corollary 4.5

If in addition to the hypotheses of Corollary 4.3, one assumes that the initial condition for the velocity field satisfies $`\rho 𝐮_0L^1(^3)^3`$, then for $`j=1,2,3`$ one has the estimate

$$\left|u_j(,t)+\underset{k=1}{\overset{3}{}}b_{kj}_kE_t()+\underset{k,\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{3}{}}c_k\mathrm{}F_{\mathrm{},jk}(,t)\right|_qCt^{\frac{1}{2}\nu +\frac{3}{2q}}𝝎_0_m,t1.$$

Comparing with equation (2.4) of  we see that this is compatible with the results of Fujigaki and Miyakawa. Rewriting the asymptotics in a slightly different way one finds that they also agree with Theorem 0.6 of .

## 5 The strong-stable manifold of the origin

In this section, we assume that $`m>7/2`$ and we consider in more detail the dynamics of (20) in the invariant subspace $`𝒲_1`$ of $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ defined by (61). If $`𝐰_0𝒲_1`$ satisfies $`𝐰_0_mr_0`$, where $`r_0>0`$ is as in Theorem 2.3, the solution $`𝐰(,\tau )`$ of (20) with initial data $`𝐰_0`$ can be decomposed as

$$𝐰(\xi ,\tau )=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\gamma _i(\tau )𝐠_i(\xi )+\underset{(ij)S}{}\zeta _{ij}(\tau )𝐡_{ij}(\xi )+𝐑(\xi ,\tau ),$$
(57)
where $`\gamma _i`$, $`\zeta _{ij}`$ are defined in (49) and $`𝐑(,\tau )`$ belongs to the subspace $`𝒲_2`$ of $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$. As for the velocity field, we have

$$𝐯(\xi ,\tau )=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\gamma _i(\tau )𝐯^{𝐠_i}(\xi )+\underset{(ij)S}{}\zeta _{ij}(\tau )𝐯^{𝐡_{ij}}(\xi )+𝐯^𝐑(\xi ,\tau ).$$

Setting $`b_i=0`$ in Theorem 4.2, we see that $`𝐰(,\tau )_m=𝒪(\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}\tau })`$ as $`\tau +\mathrm{}`$. We now define the local strong-stable manifold of the origin by

$$W_s^{loc}=\left\{𝐰_0\mathrm{L}^2(m)\right|𝐰_0_mr_0,\underset{\tau \mathrm{}}{lim}\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}\tau }\mathrm{\Phi }_\tau 𝐰_0_m=0\},$$
(58)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\tau 𝐰_0=𝐰(\tau )`$ is the solution of (20) in $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ with initial data $`𝐰_0`$. It is clear from Theorem 3.2 that $`W_s^{loc}𝒲_1`$. On the other hand, it follows from Lemma 4.1 that $`W_s^{loc}𝒲_2`$. Indeed, the inclusion $`W_s^{loc}𝒲_2`$ would mean that the integrals in the right-hand side of (50) vanish identically for vorticities $`𝐰𝒲_2`$, but it is easy to verify that this is not the case.

By construction, $`𝒲_1=𝒲_2𝒱`$, where $`𝒱`$ is the eight-dimensional space spanned by the vector fields $`𝐠_i`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$ and $`𝐡_{ij}`$ for $`(ij)S`$. Using invariant manifold theory as in , it is rather straightforward to show that $`W_s^{loc}`$ is a smooth submanifold of $`𝒲_1`$ which is tangent at the origin to the subspace $`𝒲_2`$. In other words, there exists a smooth function $`f:𝒲_2𝒱`$ satisfying $`f(0)=0`$, $`f^{}(0)=0`$, and such that $`W_s^{loc}=G(f)B(r_0)`$, where

$$G(f)=\{𝐰+f(𝐰)|𝐰𝒲_2\}𝒲_1,B(r_0)=\{𝐰𝒲_1|𝐰_mr_0\}.$$

In particular, the manifold $`W_s^{loc}`$ is of codimension $`8`$ in $`𝒲_1`$, hence of codimension $`11`$ in $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$. By construction, $`W_s^{loc}`$ is locally positively invariant in the following sense: if $`𝐰_0W_s^{loc}`$, then $`𝐰(\tau )=\mathrm{\Phi }_\tau 𝐰_0W_s^{loc}`$ as long as $`𝐰(\tau )B(r_0)`$. If in addition $`𝐰_0_mr_0/K_0`$, where $`K_0`$ is as in Theorem 2.3, then $`𝐰(\tau )W_s^{loc}`$ for all $`\tau 0`$ and $`\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}\tau }𝐰(\tau )_m0`$ as $`\tau +\mathrm{}`$.

The following result is characterization of the local strong-stable manifold.

###### Proposition 5.1

Fix $`m>7/2`$, and assume that $`𝐰_0𝒲_1\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ satisfies $`𝐰_0_mr_0`$, where $`r_0>0`$ is as in Theorem 2.3. Let $`w(\xi ,\tau )`$ be the solution of (20) with initial data $`𝐰_0`$, and let $`𝐯(\xi ,\tau )`$ be the corresponding velocity field. Define the functions $`\gamma _i(\tau ),\zeta _{ij}(\tau )`$ by (49) and the coefficients $`c_k\mathrm{}`$ by (6), with

$$𝐮(x,t)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+t}}𝐯(\frac{x}{\sqrt{1+t}},\mathrm{log}(1+t)).$$
(59)
Then the following three statements are equivalent:
1) $`\underset{\tau \mathrm{}}{lim}\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}\tau }𝐰(,\tau )_m=0`$, namely $`𝐰_0W_s^{loc}`$.
2) $`\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}t^{5/4}|𝐮(,t)|_2=0`$.
3) $`\gamma _1(0)=\gamma _2(0)=\gamma _3(0)=0`$,
$`\zeta _{11}(0)=\frac{1}{2}(c_{11}c_{33})`$, $`\zeta _{22}(0)=\frac{1}{2}(c_{22}c_{33})`$, $`\zeta _{12}(0)=c_{12}`$, $`\zeta _{13}(0)=c_{13}`$, $`\zeta _{23}(0)=c_{23}`$.

Proof: We apply Theorem 4.2 with $`\frac{3}{2}<\nu <\frac{m}{2}\frac{1}{4}`$. Since $`𝐰_0𝒲_1`$, we have $`b_i=0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$, so that $`𝐰(\tau )_m=𝒪(\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}\tau })`$ as $`\tau +\mathrm{}`$. We shall show that statements 1), 2), 3) in Proposition 5.1 are all equivalent to
4) $`c_i=0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$ and $`d_{ij}=0`$ for all $`(ij)S`$.
Indeed, it is clear from (51) that $`𝐰_{app}(\tau )_m=K\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}\tau }`$, where $`K=0`$ if and only if 4) holds. Thus $`1)4)`$ by Theorem 4.2. Similarly, it follows from (56) that $`|𝐮_{app}(t)|_2=K^{}(1+t)^{5/4}`$, where $`K^{}=0`$ if and only if 4) holds. Since $`|𝐮(t)𝐮_{app}(t)|_2C(1+t)^{\frac{1}{4}\nu }`$ by (55), we conclude that $`2)4)`$. Finally, using (6), (52) and the change of variables (59), we obtain the relations

$`d_{ii}`$ $`=`$ $`\zeta _{ii}(0)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(c_{33}c_{ii}),i=1,2,`$
$`d_{ij}`$ $`=`$ $`\zeta _{ij}(0)c_{ij},1i<j3.`$
We also know that $`c_i=\gamma _i(0)`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$. Therefore, $`3)4)`$.  QED

Using Proposition 5.1, it is easy to prove Theorem 1.1 in the case where $`𝐰_0=rot(𝐮_0)`$ satisfies $`𝐰_0_mr_0`$ for some $`m>7/2`$. Indeed, let $`𝐰(\xi ,\tau )`$ be the solution of (20) with initial data $`𝐰_0`$, and define $`\gamma _i(\tau ),\zeta _{ij}(\tau )`$ by (49). By Corollary B.5, the assumption $`\rho 𝐮_0L^1(^3)^3`$ implies that $`𝐰_0𝒲_1`$ (so that $`𝐰(\tau )𝒲_1`$ for all $`\tau 0`$) and that $`\zeta _{ij}(0)=0`$ for all $`(ij)S`$.

a) Assume first that (7) holds, namely $`𝐰_0W_s^{loc}`$. Then point 3) in Proposition 5.1 shows that $`c_{11}=c_{22}=c_{33}`$ and $`c_{ij}=0`$ if $`ij`$, hence the matrix $`(c_k\mathrm{})`$ is scalar. In addition, since $`\gamma _i(0)=0`$, we have $`b_k\mathrm{}=0`$ by Corollary B.5. This proves (8).

b) Conversely, assume that (8) holds. Then $`\gamma _i(0)=0`$ by Corollary B.5, and since $`\zeta _{ii}(0)=0=\frac{1}{2}(c_{ii}c_{33})`$ for $`i=1,2`$, $`\zeta _{ij}(0)=0=c_{ij}`$ for $`ij`$, it follows from Proposition 5.1 that $`𝐰_0W_s^{loc}`$. This concludes the argument.  QED

As is clear from this proof, if $`𝐰_0`$ lies in $`W_s^{loc}`$ and if the corresponding velocity field $`𝐯_0`$ satisfies $`\rho 𝐯_0L^1(^3)^3`$, then necessarily $`𝐰_0𝒲_2`$. Thus, from our point of view, Theorem 1.1 is a characterization of the noninvariant set $`W_s^{loc}𝒲_2`$, and not of $`W_s^{loc}`$ itself. As was already observed, $`W_s^{loc}`$ is not contained in $`𝒲_2`$, and it is not a priori obvious that $`W_s^{loc}𝒲_2\{0\}`$! In fact, using a nice argument due to L. Brandolese, it turns out that $`W_s^{loc}𝒲_2`$ is infinite-dimensional. Following , we say that a vector field $`𝐮:^3^3`$ is symmetric if it satisfies the following two properties:
A) $`u_1(x_1,x_2,x_3)=u_2(x_3,x_1,x_2)=u_3(x_2,x_3,x_1)`$ for all $`x=(x_1,x_2,x_3)^3`$.
B) For all $`i\{1,2,3\}`$, $`u_i(x_1,x_2,x_3)`$ is an odd function of $`x_i`$ and an even function of $`x_j`$
for all $`ji`$.
If $`𝐮`$ is symmetric, then $`\mathrm{\Delta }𝐮`$ and $`(𝐮)𝐮`$ are also symmetric. This implies, roughly speaking, that the space of symmetric velocity fields is invariant under the Navier-Stokes evolution (whenever defined).

Assume now that $`𝐯:^3^3`$ is symmetric and that the vorticity $`𝐰=rot𝐯`$ belongs to $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ for some $`m>7/2`$. Then $`𝐰`$ satisfies:
A’) $`w_1(\xi _1,\xi _2,\xi _3)=w_2(\xi _3,\xi _1,\xi _2)=w_3(\xi _2,\xi _3,\xi _1)`$ for all $`\xi ^3`$.
B’) For all $`i\{1,2,3\}`$, $`w_i(\xi _1,\xi _2,\xi _3)`$ is an even function of $`\xi _i`$ and an odd function of $`\xi _j`$
for all $`ji`$.
Using these properties together with (38), (49), we discover that $`\beta _i=\gamma _i=\zeta _{ij}=0`$ for all $`i,j`$, hence $`𝐰𝒲_2`$. On the other hand, it is clear that the integrals in the right-hand side of (50) vanish identically if $`𝐯`$ is symmetric, so that $`c_k\mathrm{}=0`$ in (6). Thus, if $`𝐰_mr_0`$, it follows from Proposition 5.1 that $`𝐰W_s^{loc}`$. Summarizing, we have shown:

$$W_s^{loc}𝒲_2\left\{𝐰\mathrm{L}^2(m)\right|𝐰_mr_0,𝐰=rot𝐯\text{ with }𝐯\text{ symmetric}\}.$$

We conclude this section with a somewhat surprising observation. Let $`\mathrm{\Psi }_t`$ be the local semiflow defined by the vorticity equation (9) in $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ for $`m>7/2`$. If $`𝝎\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$, let $`𝐔_\omega `$ be the velocity field obtained from $`𝝎`$ via the Biot-Savart law (10). Then

$$W_s^{loc}=\left\{𝝎_0\mathrm{L}^2(m)\right|𝝎_0_mr_0,\underset{t+\mathrm{}}{lim}t^{5/4}|𝐔_{\mathrm{\Psi }_t\omega _0}|_2=0\}.$$

This characterization follows from the equivalence $`1)2)`$ in Proposition 5.1 and from the fact that the change of variables (18), (19) reduces to the identity when $`t=0`$. As a consequence, $`W_s^{loc}`$ is locally invariant under both semiflows $`\mathrm{\Psi }_t`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\tau `$, although the orbits of the same initial point under $`\mathrm{\Psi }_t`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\tau `$ are of course different! This curious property originates in the fact that in both the original and rescaled variables the strong-stable manifold can be characterized in terms of the decay rate (as time goes to infinity) of the solutions lying in it, see  for a more detailed discussion. In concrete terms, the observation above implies that the picture of $`W_s^{loc}`$ in Fig. 2 is not affected at all when we return to the original variables using (18).

## Appendix A Spectrum of the operator $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$

In Appendix A of , we study in detail the linear operator

$$=\mathrm{\Delta }_\xi +\frac{1}{2}\xi _\xi +\frac{N}{2},\xi ^N,N1,$$
(60)
acting on the function $`L^2(m)=\{fL^2(^N)|f_m<\mathrm{}\}`$, where

$$f_m=\left(_^N(1+|\xi |)^{2m}|f(\xi )|^2d\xi \right)^{1/2}.$$

In particular, we determine exactly the spectrum of $``$:

###### Theorem A.1

 Fix $`m0`$, and let $``$ be the linear operator (60) in $`L^2(m)`$, defined on its maximal domain. Then the spectrum of $``$ is

$$\sigma ()=\left\{\lambda \right|\mathrm{}(\lambda )\frac{N}{4}\frac{m}{2}\}\left\{\frac{k}{2}\right|k\}.$$

Moreover, if $`m>\frac{N}{2}`$ and if $`k`$ satisfies $`k+\frac{N}{2}<m`$, then $`\mu _k=\frac{k}{2}`$ is an isolated eigenvalue of $``$, with multiplicity $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{N+k1}{k}\right)`$.

The eigenfunctions corresponding to the isolated eigenvalues $`\mu _k=\frac{k}{2}`$ can be computed explicitly. Moreover, it is shown in  that $``$ generates a $`C_0`$ semigroup $`\mathrm{e}^\tau `$ in $`L^2(m)`$, and sharp estimates are obtained for the norm of $`\mathrm{e}^\tau `$ in various spectral subspaces of $`L^2(m)`$.

In this section, we adapt the results in  to the particular case where $`N=3`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }+\frac{1}{2}`$ acts on the space of divergence free vector fields $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ defined in (24). Remark that $`div(\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐟)=div(𝐟)`$, so that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ preserves the divergence free condition. The analogue of Theorem A.1 is:

###### Theorem A.2

Fix $`m0`$, and let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ be the linear operator (21) in $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$, defined on its maximal domain. Then the spectrum of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is

$$\sigma (\mathrm{\Lambda })=\left\{\lambda \right|\mathrm{}(\lambda )\frac{1}{4}\frac{m}{2}\}\left\{\frac{k+1}{2}\right|k^{}\},$$

where $`^{}=\{0\}`$. Moreover, if $`m>\frac{5}{2}`$ and if $`k^{}`$ satisfies $`k+\frac{3}{2}<m`$, then $`\lambda _k=\frac{k+1}{2}`$ is an isolated eigenvalue of $``$, with multiplicity $`k(k+2)`$.

Proof: We first discuss the discrete spectrum of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Fix $`k`$, and take $`\alpha =(\alpha _1,\alpha _2,\alpha _3)^3`$ such that $`|\alpha |=\alpha _1+\alpha _2+\alpha _3=k`$. Then the Hermite function $`\varphi _\alpha :^3`$ defined by

$$\varphi _\alpha =^\alpha G_1^{\alpha _1}_2^{\alpha _2}_3^{\alpha _3}G,\text{ where }G(\xi )=\frac{1}{(4\pi )^{3/2}}\mathrm{e}^{|\xi |^2/4},$$

is an eigenfunction of $``$ with eigenvalue $`\frac{k}{2}`$. Let $`E_k=\mathrm{span}\{\varphi _\alpha |\alpha ^3,|\alpha |=k\}`$ and

$$_k=\{𝐟=(f_1,f_2,f_3)|div𝐟=0,f_iE_k\text{ for }i=1,2,3\}.$$

By construction, $`_k\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ for all $`m0`$, and any $`𝐟_k`$ satisfies $`\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐟=\frac{k+1}{2}𝐟`$. Moreover, using the characterization of $`_k`$ in Fourier variables (see ), it is not difficult to show that $`dim(_k)=k(k+2)`$. In particular, for any $`k^{}`$, $`\lambda _k=\frac{k+1}{2}`$ is an eigenvalue of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ with multiplicity (at least) $`k(k+2)`$.

Next, fix $`\lambda `$ such that $`\mathrm{}(\lambda )<1/4`$ and $`(\lambda +1)`$. Proceeding as in , it is easy to verify that the function $`\psi _\lambda :^3`$ defined in Fourier variables by

$$\widehat{\psi }_\lambda (p)=|p|^{2(\lambda +1)}\mathrm{e}^{|p|^2}(\mathrm{i}p_2,\mathrm{i}p_1,0)$$

satisfies $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\psi _\lambda =\lambda \psi _\lambda `$ and $`div\psi _\lambda =0`$. Moreover, $`\psi _\lambda \mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ if and only if $`\mathrm{}(\lambda )<\frac{1}{4}\frac{m}{2}`$. This shows that $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Lambda })\{\lambda |\mathrm{}(\lambda )\frac{1}{4}\frac{m}{2}\}`$.

Now, fix $`n`$ and assume that $`m0`$, $`m>n+\frac{3}{2}`$. Let

$$W_n=\left\{fL^2(m)\right|_^3\xi ^\alpha f(\xi )d\xi =0\text{ for all }\alpha ^3\text{ with }|\alpha |n\}.$$

In particular, $`W_n=L^2(m)`$ if $`n<0`$. We define closed subspaces $`𝒱_n`$, $`𝒲_n`$ of $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ by $`𝒱_n=_{k=1}^n_k`$ and

$$𝒲_n=\left\{𝐟\mathrm{L}^2(m)\right|f_iW_n\text{ for }i=1,2,3\}.$$
(61)
By definition, $`𝒱_n=\{0\}`$ and $`𝒲_n=\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ if $`n0`$. (We recall that any $`𝐟\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ with $`m>\frac{3}{2}`$ satisfies $`_^3𝐟(\xi )d\xi =0`$ as a consequence of the divergence free condition; hence $`𝒲_0=\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$.) Using again the characterization of $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ in Fourier variables, it is easy to verify that $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)=𝒱_n𝒲_n`$. Let $`P_n:\mathrm{L}^2(m)\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ be the (unique) continuous projection satisfying $`\mathrm{range}(P_n)=𝒱_n`$, $`\mathrm{ker}(P_n)=𝒲_n`$, and let $`Q_n=\mathrm{𝟏}P_n`$. In particular, $`P_n=0`$ and $`Q_n=\mathrm{𝟏}`$ for all $`n`$, $`n0`$. The following estimates on the semigroup $`\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}=\mathrm{e}^{\tau /2}\mathrm{e}^\tau `$ are proved in  (Proposition A.2):

###### Proposition A.3

Let $`a(\tau )=1\mathrm{e}^\tau `$, $`\tau 0`$.
(a) Fix $`m0`$, and take $`n`$ such that $`n+\frac{3}{2}<mn+\frac{5}{2}`$. For all $`\alpha ^3`$ and all $`ϵ>0`$, there exists $`C>0`$ such that

$$^\alpha \mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}f_m\frac{C}{a(\tau )^{|\alpha |/2}}\mathrm{e}^{\frac{\tau }{2}(\frac{1}{2}m+ϵ)}f_m,\tau >0,$$
(62)
for all $`fW_nL^2(m)`$.

(b) Fix $`n\{1\}`$, and take $`m`$ such that $`m>n+\frac{5}{2}`$. For all $`\alpha ^3`$ and all $`ϵ>0`$, there exists $`C>0`$ such that

$$^\alpha \mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}f_m\frac{C}{a(\tau )^{|\alpha |/2}}\mathrm{e}^{\frac{n+2}{2}\tau }f_m,\tau >0,$$
(63)
for all $`fW_nL^2(m)`$.

If $`m`$ and $`n`$ are as in part (a) of Proposition A.3, it follows from (62) that

$$\mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}Q_n𝐟_mC\mathrm{e}^{\frac{\tau }{2}(\frac{1}{2}m+ϵ)}𝐟_m,\tau 0,$$

for all $`𝐟\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$. By the Hille-Yosida theorem, this implies that $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Lambda }Q_n)\{\lambda |\mathrm{}(\lambda )\frac{1}{4}\frac{m}{2}\}`$. On the other hand, by construction, we have $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Lambda }P_n)=\mathrm{}`$ if $`n0`$ and $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Lambda }P_n)=\{1;\frac{3}{2};\mathrm{};\frac{n+1}{2}\}`$ if $`n^{}`$. In particular, $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Lambda }P_n)\sigma (\mathrm{\Lambda }Q_n)=\mathrm{}`$, hence the multiplicity of the eigenvalue $`\lambda _k`$ ($`k=1,\mathrm{},n`$) is exactly $`k(k+2)`$. Finally, since $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Lambda })\sigma (\mathrm{\Lambda }P_n)\sigma (\mathrm{\Lambda }Q_n)`$, we have

$$\sigma (\mathrm{\Lambda })\left\{\lambda \right|\mathrm{}(\lambda )\frac{1}{4}\frac{m}{2}\}\left\{\frac{k+1}{2}\right|k^{}\}.$$

This concludes the proof of Theorem A.2. QED

The estimates in Proposition A.3 can be generalized to weighted $`L^p`$ spaces with $`p2`$. For our purposes in this paper, the following result will be sufficient:

###### Proposition A.4

Let $`1qp\mathrm{}`$, $`m0`$ and $`T>0`$. For all $`\alpha ^3`$, there exists $`C>0`$ such that, for all $`fL^q(m)`$,

$$|\rho ^m^\alpha \mathrm{e}^{\tau \mathrm{\Lambda }}f|_p\frac{C}{a(\tau )^{\frac{3}{2}(\frac{1}{q}\frac{1}{p})+\frac{|\alpha |}{2}}}|\rho ^mf|_q,0<\tau T,$$
(64)
where $`\rho (\xi )=1+|\xi |`$.

Proof: See , Proposition A.5.

## Appendix B Bounds on the velocity field

We first list a few identities that are satisfied by the vorticity $`𝐰`$ as a consequence of the divergence free condition. If $`𝐰\mathrm{L}^1(^3)^3`$, then

$$_^3w_i(\xi )d\xi =0\text{for all }i\{1,2,3\},$$
(65)
because $`w_i=div(\xi _i𝐰)`$. This fact is not hard to prove in Fourier variables, but has been overlooked in some papers on the subject until recently. If in addition $`\rho 𝐰L^1(^3)^3`$ (where $`\rho (\xi )=1+|\xi |`$), then

$$_^3(\xi _iw_j(\xi )+\xi _jw_i(\xi ))d\xi =0\text{for all }i,j\{1,2,3\},$$
(66)
because $`\xi _iw_j+\xi _jw_i=div(\xi _i\xi _j𝐰)`$. Thus only three first-order moments of $`𝐰`$ (out of nine) are possibly nonzero. Finally, if we assume that $`\rho ^2𝐰L^1(^3)^3`$, then

$$_^3(\xi _i\xi _jw_k(\xi )+\xi _j\xi _kw_i(\xi )+\xi _k\xi _iw_j(\xi ))d\xi =0\text{for all }i,j,k\{1,2,3\},$$
(67)
because $`\xi _i\xi _jw_k+\xi _j\xi _kw_i+\xi _k\xi _iw_j=div(\xi _i\xi _j\xi _k𝐰)`$. This means that only eight second-order moments of $`𝐰`$ (out of eighteen) are possibly nonzero.

Next, we give explicit formulas for the velocity fields corresponding, via the Biot-Savart law (10), to the first eigenfunctions of the linear operator $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ acting on $`\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$.

1) If $`m>5/2`$, the first eigenvalue $`\lambda _2=1`$ has multiplicity three. A basis of eigenfunctions is $`\{𝐟_1,𝐟_2,𝐟_3\}`$, where $`𝐟_i=𝐩_iG`$ and $`𝐩_1,𝐩_2,𝐩_3`$ are defined in (36). The corresponding velocity fields are

$$𝐯^{𝐟_i}=_i(\mathrm{\Phi })+G𝐞_i,i=1,2,3,$$
(68)
where

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi )=\frac{1}{(4\pi )^{3/2}}\frac{2}{|\xi |}_0^{|\xi |}\mathrm{e}^{z^2/4}dz,\xi ^3\{0\}.$$

Remark that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }=G`$, so that $`div𝐯^{𝐟_i}=0`$ and $`rot𝐯^{𝐟_i}=rot(G𝐞_i)=𝐟_i`$. A direct calculation shows that $`𝐯^{𝐟_i}|\xi |^3`$ as $`|\xi |\mathrm{}`$, hence $`𝐯^{𝐟_i}\mathrm{L}^1(^3)`$.

2) If $`m>7/2`$, the second eigenvalue $`\lambda _3=3/2`$ has multiplicity eight. A convenient basis of eigenfunctions is given by $`\{𝐠_i\}_{i=1,2,3}`$ and $`\{𝐡_{ij}\}_{(ij)S}`$, where $`𝐠_i`$ are defined in (44) and $`𝐡_{ij}`$ in (46). (We recall that $`S=\{(11),(12),(13),(22),(23)\}`$.) The corresponding velocity fields read

$$𝐯^{𝐠_i}=𝐟_i,𝐯^{𝐡_{ij}}=_i𝐯^{𝐟_j}+_j𝐯^{𝐟_i}.$$

Clearly, $`𝐯^{𝐠_i}(\xi )`$ has a Gaussian decay as $`|\xi |\mathrm{}`$, whereas $`𝐯^{𝐡_{ij}}(\xi )|\xi |^4`$. In particular, $`𝐯^{𝐡_{ij}}\mathrm{L}^1(^3)`$, but $`\rho 𝐯^{𝐡_{ij}}\mathrm{L}^1(^3)`$.

Now, we assume that $`𝐰\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ for some $`m>7/2`$. Then $`𝐰`$ can be decomposed as

$$𝐰(\xi )=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\beta _i𝐟_i(\xi )+\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\gamma _i𝐠_i(\xi )+\underset{(ij)S}{}\zeta _{ij}𝐡_{ij}(\xi )+\stackrel{~}{𝐰}(\xi ),$$
(69)
where the coefficients $`\beta _i`$ are defined in (38) and $`\gamma _i`$, $`\zeta _{ij}`$ in (49). The velocity field $`𝐯`$ associated to $`𝐰`$ has a similar decomposition:

$$𝐯(\xi )=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\beta _i𝐯^{𝐟_i}(\xi )+\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\gamma _i𝐯^{𝐠_i}(\xi )+\underset{(ij)S}{}\zeta _{ij}𝐯^{𝐡_{ij}}(\xi )+\stackrel{~}{𝐯}(\xi ),$$
(70)
where $`\stackrel{~}{𝐯}`$ is obtained from $`\stackrel{~}{𝐰}`$ via the Biot-Savart law (10). In view of (38) and (66), it is clear that $`\beta _i=0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$ if and only if

$$_^3\xi _iw_j(\xi )d\xi =0\text{for all }i,j\{1,2,3\}.$$
(71)
On the other hand, it follows from (49) and (67) that $`\zeta _{ij}=0`$ for all $`(ij)S`$ if and only if

$$\begin{array}{c}M_{22}^1=M_{33}^1=2M_{12}^2=2M_{13}^3,\hfill \\ M_{11}^2=M_{33}^2=2M_{12}^1=2M_{23}^3,\hfill \\ M_{11}^3=M_{22}^3=2M_{13}^1=2M_{23}^2,\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{c}M_{11}^1=M_{22}^2=M_{33}^3=0,\hfill \\ M_{23}^1=M_{13}^2=M_{12}^3=0,\hfill \end{array}$$
(72)
where

$$M_{jk}^i=_^3\xi _j\xi _kw_i(\xi )d\xi =M_{kj}^i,i,j,k\{1,2,3\}.$$

If in addition $`\gamma _i=0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$, then $`M_{jk}^i=0`$ for all $`i,j,k\{1,2,3\}`$.

The main result of this section is the following estimate for the velocity field in terms of the vorticity:

###### Proposition B.1

Let $`𝐰\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ for some $`m0`$, and let $`𝐯`$ be the velocity field obtained from $`𝐰`$ via the Biot-Savart law (10). Define the coefficients $`\beta _i`$ by (38) and $`\zeta _{ij}`$ by (49). Assume that either
1) $`0m<3/2`$, or
2) $`3/2<m<5/2`$, or
3) $`5/2<m<7/2`$ and $`\beta _i=0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$, or
4) $`7/2<m<9/2`$, $`\beta _i=0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$, and $`\zeta _{ij}=0`$ for $`(ij)S`$.
Then there exists $`C>0`$ such that

$$|\rho ^m𝐯|_6C|\rho ^m𝐰|_2,$$
(73)
where $`\rho (\xi )=1+|\xi |`$.

Remark. More generally, Proposition B.1 holds for any (not necessarily divergence free) vector field $`𝐰`$ satisfying $`\rho ^m𝐰L^2(^3)^3`$, provided that either
1) $`0m<3/2`$, or
2) $`3/2<m<5/2`$ and (65) holds, or
3) $`5/2<m<7/2`$ and (65), (71) hold, or
4) $`7/2<m<9/2`$ and (65), (71), (72) hold.
Roughly speaking, the result means that $`𝐯(\xi )`$ decays like $`|\xi |^{m\frac{1}{2}}`$ as $`|\xi |\mathrm{}`$.

The proof of Proposition B.1 is naturally divided into four steps. In the case 1), the bound (73) is a direct consequence of (22) and of the following weighted Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality:

###### Lemma B.2

If $`1/2<m<3/2`$ and

$$u(\xi )=_^3\frac{\omega (\eta )}{|\xi \eta |^2}d\eta ,\xi ^3,$$

then $`|\rho ^mu|_6C|\rho ^m\omega |_2`$.

Proof: We use the dyadic decomposition

$$^3=\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}B_j,$$

where $`B_0=\{\xi ^3||\xi |1\}`$ and $`B_j=\{\xi ^3|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}^{j1}<|\xi |2^j\}`$ for $`j^{}`$. Let $`u_i=u\mathrm{𝟏}_{B_i}`$ and $`\omega _i=\omega \mathrm{𝟏}_{B_i}`$, $`i`$. Clearly $`u_i=_j\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}`$, where

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}(\xi )=\mathrm{𝟏}_{B_i}(\xi )_{B_j}\frac{\omega _j(\eta )}{|\xi \eta |^2}d\eta .$$

If $`|ij|1`$, it follows from (11) that $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}|_6C|\omega _j|_2`$. If $`|ij|2`$, Young’s inequality implies that $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}|_6M_1^{3/4}M_2^{1/4}|\omega _j|_2`$, where

$$M_1=\underset{\xi B_i}{sup}\left(_{B_j}\frac{1}{|\xi \eta |^3}d\eta \right)^{2/3},M_2=\underset{\eta B_j}{sup}\left(_{B_i}\frac{1}{|\xi \eta |^3}d\xi \right)^{2/3}.$$

If $`ij+2`$, then $`|\xi \eta ||\xi ||\eta |2^{i1}2^j2^{i2}`$ for all $`\xi B_i`$, $`\eta B_j`$. Thus $`M_1C2^{2i}\mu (B_j)^{2/3}C2^{2(ij)}`$ and $`M_2C2^{2i}\mu (B_i)^{2/3}C`$ for some $`C>0`$ independent of $`i,j`$, hence $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}|_6C2^{\frac{3}{2}(ij)}|\omega _j|_2`$. If $`ji+2`$, then $`|\xi \eta |2^{j2}`$ for all $`\xi B_i`$, $`\eta B_j`$, and a similar calculation shows that $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}|_6C2^{\frac{1}{2}(ji)}|\omega _j|_2`$. Summarizing, we have shown that

$$|u_i|_6C\underset{j}{}K_{ij}|\omega _j|_2,i,$$

where $`K_{ij}=2^{|ij|\frac{1}{2}(ij)}`$. Now, by definition of the sets $`B_i`$, we have $`|\rho ^mu_i|C2^{mi}|u_i|`$ and $`|\rho ^m\omega _j|C2^{mj}|\omega _j|`$ for all $`i,j`$. It follows that

$$|\rho ^mu_i|_6C\underset{j}{}K_{ij}^{(m)}|\rho ^m\omega _j|_2,i,$$

where $`K_{ij}^{(m)}=2^{|ij|+(m\frac{1}{2})(ij)}`$. In particular, $`|K_{ij}^{(m)}|2^{\alpha |ij|}`$ for some $`\alpha >0`$, hence $`K^{(m)}`$ defines a bounded linear operator from $`\mathrm{}^2()`$ into $`\mathrm{}^6()`$. This concludes the proof.  QED

To prove (73) in the remaining cases, we also need the following variant of Lemma B.2:

###### Lemma B.3

If $`\frac{1}{2}<m<\frac{1}{2}`$ and

$$u(\xi )=_^3\frac{\omega (\eta )}{|\xi \eta |}d\eta ,\xi ^3,$$

then $`|\rho ^mu|_6C|\rho ^{m+1}\omega |_2`$.

Proof: We use the same notations as in the preceding proof. If $`|ij|1`$, it follows from the Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality that $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}|C|\omega _j|_{6/5}`$. By Hölder, $`|\omega _j|_{6/5}C\mu (B_j)^{1/3}|\omega _j|_2C2^j|\omega _j|_2`$, hence $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}|_6C2^j|\omega _j|_2`$. If $`|ij|2`$, then $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}|_6N_1^{3/4}N_2^{1/4}|\omega _j|_2`$, where

$$N_1=\underset{\xi B_i}{sup}\left(_{B_j}\frac{1}{|\xi \eta |^{3/2}}d\eta \right)^{2/3},N_2=\underset{\eta B_j}{sup}\left(_{B_i}\frac{1}{|\xi \eta |^{3/2}}d\xi \right)^{2/3}.$$

Proceeding as above, we deduce that $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}|_6C2^{\frac{1}{2}|ij|}2^j|\omega _j|_2`$ for all $`i,j`$. It follows that

$$|\rho ^mu_i|_6C\underset{j}{}\stackrel{~}{K}_{ij}^{(m)}|\rho ^{m+1}\omega _j|_2,$$

where $`\stackrel{~}{K}_{ij}^{(m)}=2^{\frac{1}{2}|ij|+m(ij)}`$. Thus, if $`|m|<1/2`$, $`\stackrel{~}{K}^{(m)}`$ defines a bounded linear operator from $`\mathrm{}^2()`$ into $`\mathrm{}^6()`$.  QED

We are now ready to prove Proposition B.1 in the case 2). If $`3/2<m<5/2`$ and $`𝐰\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$, then $`𝐰`$ is integrable and (65) holds. As a consequence, we can rewrite (22) in the form

$$v_i(\xi )=\frac{1}{4\pi }\underset{j,k=1}{\overset{3}{}}ϵ_{ijk}_^3\left(\frac{\xi _j\eta _j}{|\xi \eta |^3}\frac{\xi _j}{|\xi |^3}\right)w_k(\eta )d\eta ,$$
(74)
where $`ϵ_{ijk}=sign(\sigma )`$ if $`(ijk)`$ is a permutation $`\sigma `$ of $`(123)`$, and $`ϵ_{ijk}=0`$ otherwise. Using the identity

$$|\xi |^3(\xi _j\eta _j)|\xi \eta |^3\xi _j=(\xi _j\eta _j)|\xi |^2(|\xi ||\xi \eta |)+|\xi \eta |(2\xi _j(\xi \eta )\eta _j|\xi |^2\xi _j|\eta |^2),$$

we obtain

$`\left||\xi |^3(\xi _j\eta _j)|\xi \eta |^3\xi _j\right|`$ $``$ $`C|\xi \eta ||\xi ||\eta |(|\xi |+|\eta |)`$
$``$ $`C(|\xi \eta ||\xi |^2|\eta |+|\xi \eta |^2|\xi ||\eta |).`$
Thus, it follows from (74) that $`|𝐯(\xi )|C(f(\xi )+g(\xi ))`$, where

$$f(\xi )=\frac{1}{|\xi |}_^3\frac{|\eta ||𝐰(\eta )|}{|\xi \eta |^2}d\eta ,g(\xi )=\frac{1}{|\xi |^2}_^3\frac{|\eta ||𝐰(\eta )|}{|\xi \eta |}d\eta .$$

Since we already know that $`|𝐯|_6C|𝐰|_2`$, it is sufficient to bound $`|\rho _0^m𝐯|_6`$, where $`\rho _0(\xi )=|\xi |\mathrm{𝟏}_{\{|\xi |1\}}`$. Applying Lemma B.2 with $`u(\xi )=|\xi |f(\xi )`$ and $`\omega (\eta )=|\eta ||𝐰(\eta )|`$, we find $`|\rho _0^mf|_6|\rho ^{m1}u|_6C|\rho ^{m1}\omega |_2C|\rho ^m𝐰|_2`$. Similarly, applying Lemma B.3 with $`u(\xi )=|\xi |^2g(\xi )`$ and $`\omega (\eta )=|\eta ||𝐰(\eta )|`$, we find $`|\rho _0^mg|_6C|\rho ^{m2}u|_6C|\rho ^{m1}\omega |_2C|\rho ^m𝐰|_2`$. Summarizing, we have shown that $`|\rho ^m𝐯|_6C|\rho ^m𝐰|_2`$ if $`3/2<m<5/2`$.

We next assume that $`5/2<m<7/2`$ and that $`\beta _i=0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$. As was already observed, this implies that (71) holds. Thus (74) can be written in the form

$$v_i(\xi )=\frac{1}{4\pi }\underset{j,k=1}{\overset{3}{}}ϵ_{ijk}_^3\left(\frac{\xi _j\eta _j}{|\xi \eta |^3}\frac{\xi _j\eta _j}{|\xi |^3}\frac{3(\xi \eta )\xi _j}{|\xi |^5}\right)w_k(\eta )d\eta .$$
(76)
To bound the right-hand side, we observe that

$$\begin{array}{c}|\xi |^5(\xi _j\eta _j)|\xi |^2|\xi \eta |^3(\xi _j\eta _j)3|\xi \eta |^3(\xi \eta )\xi _j\hfill \\ =(\xi _j\eta _j)|\xi |^2(|\xi |^3|\xi \eta |^33|\xi |(\xi \eta ))\hfill \\ +\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}(\xi \eta )(|\xi |^3(\xi _j\eta _j)|\xi \eta |^3\xi _j).\hfill \end{array}$$
(77)
We claim that

$$\left||\xi |^3|\xi \eta |^33|\xi |(\xi \eta )\right|C|\eta |^2(|\xi |+|\eta |).$$
(78)
Indeed, this follows from the identity

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill |\xi |^3|\xi \eta |^33|\xi |(\xi \eta )& =& 2(|\xi \eta ||\xi |)(\xi \eta )|\xi \eta ||\eta |^2\hfill \\ & & |\xi |(|\xi ||\xi \eta |+(\xi \eta )|\xi |^2),\hfill \end{array}$$

and from the bound

$$0|\xi ||\xi \eta |+(\xi \eta )|\xi |^2\frac{1}{2}|\eta |^2,$$
(79)
which is easily proved by setting $`\eta =\xi \zeta `$, $`\zeta ^3`$.

Using (77) together with (B), (78), we obtain

$$\begin{array}{c}\left||\xi |^5(\xi _j\eta _j)|\xi |^2|\xi \eta |^3(\xi _j\eta _j)3|\xi \eta |^3(\xi \eta )\xi _j\right|\hfill \\ C|\xi \eta ||\xi |^2|\eta |^2(|\xi |+|\eta |)\hfill \\ C(|\xi \eta ||\xi |^3|\eta |^2+|\xi \eta |^2|\xi |^2|\eta |^2).\hfill \end{array}$$

Thus, it follows from (76) that $`|𝐯(\xi )|C(f(\xi )+g(\xi ))`$, where

$$f(\xi )=\frac{1}{|\xi |^2}_^3\frac{|\eta |^2|𝐰(\eta )|}{|\xi \eta |^2}d\eta ,g(\xi )=\frac{1}{|\xi |^3}_^3\frac{|\eta |^2|𝐰(\eta )|}{|\xi \eta |}d\eta .$$

Applying Lemmas B.2 and B.3 as in the previous case, we easily obtain $`|\rho _0^mf|_6+|\rho _0^mg|_6C|\rho ^m𝐰|_2`$. This prove (73) in the case 3).

Finally, we assume that $`7/2<m<9/2`$ and that $`\beta _i=0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$, $`\zeta _{ij}=0`$ for $`(ij)S`$. As we already remarked, this implies that (72) holds. Using (72), it is straightforward (but somewhat tedious) to verify that

$$\underset{j,k=1}{\overset{3}{}}ϵ_{ijk}_^3\left(2|\xi |^2(\xi \eta )\eta _j+\xi _j(|\xi |^2|\eta |^25(\xi \eta )^2)\right)w_k(\eta )d\eta =0,i.$$
(80)
Assuming (80), we can rewrite (76) in the form

$$v_i(\xi )=\frac{1}{4\pi }\underset{j,k=1}{\overset{3}{}}ϵ_{ijk}_^3\frac{A_j(\xi ,\eta )w_k(\eta )}{|\xi \eta |^3|\xi |^7}d\eta ,$$
(81)
where

$`A_j(\xi ,\eta )`$ $`=`$ $`|\xi |^7(\xi _j\eta _j)|\xi |^4|\xi \eta |^3(\xi _j\eta _j)`$
$``$ $`3|\xi |^2|\xi \eta |^3(\xi \eta )(\xi _j\eta _j){\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\xi _j|\xi \eta |^3(5(\xi \eta )^2|\xi |^2|\eta |^2).`$
We claim that

$$|A_j|C|\xi \eta ||\xi |^3|\eta |^3(|\xi |+|\eta |)C(|\xi \eta ||\xi |^4|\eta |^3+|\xi \eta |^2|\xi |^3|\eta |^3).$$
(82)
Assuming (82) for the moment, we deduce from (81) that $`|𝐯(\xi )|C(f(\xi )+g(\xi ))`$, where

$$f(\xi )=\frac{1}{|\xi |^3}_^3\frac{|\eta |^3|𝐰(\eta )|}{|\xi \eta |^2}d\eta ,g(\xi )=\frac{1}{|\xi |^4}_^3\frac{|\eta |^3|𝐰(\eta )|}{|\xi \eta |}d\eta .$$

Applying Lemmas B.2 and B.3 again, we obtain $`|\rho _0^mf|_6+|\rho _0^mg|_6C|\rho ^m𝐰|_2`$. This proves (73) in the case 4).

It remains to establish (82). We first remark that $`A_j=(\xi _j\eta _j)|\xi |^2B+C_j`$, where

$`B`$ $`=`$ $`|\xi |^5|\xi |^2|\xi \eta |^33|\xi \eta |^3(\xi \eta ){\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}|\xi |(5(\xi \eta )^2|\xi |^2|\eta |^2),`$
$`C_j`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\left(|\xi |^3(\xi _j\eta _j)\xi _j|\xi \eta |^3\right)\left(5(\xi \eta )^2|\xi |^2|\eta |^2\right).`$
In view of (B), it is clear that $`|C_j|C|\xi \eta ||\xi |^3|\eta |^3(|\xi |+|\eta |)`$. Thus, it is sufficient to show that

$$|B|C|\xi ||\eta |^3(|\xi |+|\eta |).$$
(83)
To this end, we remark that

$`B`$ $`=`$ $`|\xi |D+(\xi \eta )(|\xi |^3|\xi \eta |^33|\xi |(\xi \eta ))`$ (84)
$`+`$ $`(|\xi \eta ||\xi |)(4(\xi \eta )^2|\xi |^2|\eta |^2)2|\eta |^2(\xi \eta )|\xi \eta |,`$ (85)
where

$`D`$ $`=`$ $`|\xi |^4|\xi |^2(\xi \eta )+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|\xi |^2|\eta |^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\xi \eta )^2|\xi |^3|\xi \eta |`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(|\xi ||\xi \eta |+(\xi \eta )|\xi |^2\right)(|\xi |(|\xi \eta ||\xi |)(\xi \eta )).`$
Using (79), we find $`|D|\frac{1}{2}|\xi ||\eta |^3`$. Inserting this bound into (84) and using (78), we obtain (83). This concludes the proof of Proposition B.1.  QED

We conclude with two corollaries which are used in the preceding sections.

###### Corollary B.4

Assume that $`𝐰\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ for some $`m>\frac{5}{2}`$, and denote by $`𝐯`$ the velocity field obtained from $`𝐰`$ via the Biot-Savart law (10). Then $`𝐯L^1(^3)^3`$ if and only if $`\beta _i=0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$, and in this case $`_^3v_i(\xi )d\xi =0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$.

Proof: Without loss of generality, we assume that $`5/2<m<7/2`$. For any $`𝐰\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$, we have the decomposition

$$𝐰=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\beta _i𝐟_i+\stackrel{~}{𝐰},𝐯=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\beta _i𝐯^{𝐟_i}+\stackrel{~}{𝐯},$$

where the coefficients $`\beta _i`$ are defined in (38). Then the remainder $`\stackrel{~}{𝐰}\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ fulfills the moment conditions (71). By Proposition B.1, the corresponding velocity field satisfies $`\rho ^m\stackrel{~}{𝐯}L^6(^3)^3`$, hence $`\stackrel{~}{𝐯}\mathrm{L}^1(^3)`$. On the other hand, it is easy to verify that $`\beta _i𝐯^{𝐟_i}\mathrm{L}^1(^3)`$ if and only if $`\beta _i=0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$. Thus $`𝐯\mathrm{L}^1(^3)`$ if and only if $`\beta _1=\beta _2=\beta _3=0`$. In this case, $`_^3v_i(\xi )d\xi =0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$ because $`div𝐯=0`$, see (65).  QED

###### Corollary B.5

Assume that $`𝐰\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ for some $`m>\frac{7}{2}`$, and denote by $`𝐯`$ the velocity field obtained from $`𝐰`$ via the Biot-Savart law (10). Then $`\rho 𝐯L^1(^3)^3`$ if and only if $`\beta _i=0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$ and $`\zeta _{ij}=0`$ for $`(ij)S`$. In this case, the matrix $`(b_k\mathrm{})`$ defined by

$$b_k\mathrm{}=_^3\xi _kv_{\mathrm{}}(\xi )d\xi ,k,\mathrm{}\{1,2,3\},$$
(86)
is skew-symmetric, and $`b_{12}=\gamma _3`$, $`b_{23}=\gamma _1`$, $`b_{31}=\gamma _2`$.

Proof: Without loss of generality, we assume that $`7/2<m<9/2`$. If $`𝐰\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$, then $`𝐰`$ and $`𝐯`$ can be decomposed according to (69), (70). By construction, the remainder $`\stackrel{~}{𝐰}\mathrm{L}^2(m)`$ has vanishing first-order and second-order moments. Applying Proposition B.1, we deduce that the corresponding velocity field satisfies $`\rho ^m\stackrel{~}{𝐯}L^6(^3)^3`$, hence $`\rho \stackrel{~}{𝐯}L^1(^3)^3`$. Therefore, using the expressions above of $`𝐟_i`$, $`𝐠_i`$, and $`𝐡_{ij}`$, it is not difficult to show that $`\rho 𝐯L^1(^3)^3`$ if and only if $`\beta _i=0`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$ and $`\zeta _{ij}=0`$ for $`(ij)S`$. In this case, the matrix $`(b_k\mathrm{})`$ defined by (86) is skew-symmetric because $`div𝐯=0`$, see (66).

Assume now that $`\rho 𝐯L^1(^3)^3`$, and consider the vector field $`𝐀(\xi )=𝐪_3(\xi )𝐯(\xi )`$, where $`𝐪_3`$ is defined in (45). Then $`𝐀L^{3/2}(^3)^3`$ and $`div𝐀=𝐩_3𝐯𝐪_3𝐰`$, where $`𝐩_3=rot𝐪_3`$ is defined in (36). It follows that

$$0=_^3div𝐀\mathrm{d}\xi =_^3(𝐩_3𝐯𝐪_3𝐰)d\xi =b_{12}\gamma _3,$$

in view of (36), (86), and (49). The relations $`b_{23}=\gamma _1`$ and $`b_{31}=\gamma _2`$ are proved in a similar way.  QED