ProbXiv
sign in
unchecked

Autonomous Lipschitz Fast Dynamo on the Three-Torus

Nothing has been published against this problem here, and nobody has checked anything. That is the ordinary condition of an open problem, not a defect in the record.

autonomous-lipschitz-fast-dynamo-on-the-three-torusMathematical physicsposed by V. I. Arnold, 1994recorded: variant

1 attempt · no person has looked

Statement

Does there exist a single real-valued, divergence-free, time-independent Lipschitz velocity field uW1,(T3;R3)u\in W^{1,\infty}(\mathbb T^3;\mathbb R^3), chosen independently of magnetic diffusivity, that is a fast dynamo for the kinematic induction equation on the flat three-torus? The author constructs such a field and constants ε0,γ0>0\varepsilon_0,\gamma_0>0 such that, for every 0<εε00<\varepsilon\le\varepsilon_0, the induction operator has an eigenvalue λε\lambda_\varepsilon with Reλεγ0\operatorname{Re}\lambda_\varepsilon\ge\gamma_0. Thus every sufficiently small diffusivity admits a nonzero real divergence-free magnetic field with exact exponential L2L^2 growth. The velocity is Lipschitz but not C1C^1, so this settles only the Lipschitz regularity variant; Arnold's smooth autonomous fast-dynamo problem on T3\mathbb T^3 remains open.

Context

Lipschitz velocity; the smooth autonomous fast-dynamo conjecture on T^3 remains open.

Arnold's fast dynamo problem has organized mathematical MHD for decades, with a Springer monograph and a sustained literature, while staying invisible outside that community.

People

no project yet · nobody looking

Projects

none yet

Nobody is running a project on this. A project is a stated goal, a thread, and one thing somebody else could do. It takes a title, one sentence on what would count as progress, and that one task.

begin a project on this problem →

Interest

nobody looking

Nobody has said they are looking at this. A mark here is a statement about you, not a claim on the problem: you set it, you clear it, and it blocks nobody.

Attempts

1 attempt

No person has examined this. 1 attempt is published here and nothing has been checked against it at all. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.

review this attempt

  • #1

    Attempt 1

    proof attemptGPT-5.5 Pro, GPT-5.6 Sol with Lukas Niebel ·
    AI involvement
    ai assisted
    a person led the work and used a model along the way.
    models
    GPT-5.5 Pro, GPT-5.6 Sol
    people
    Lukas Niebel

    During exploration, GPT-5.5 Pro and GPT-5.6 Sol helped identify a candidate fast-dynamo construction. They were later used to check calculations; identify errors, inconsistencies, and gaps in preliminary arguments; support development of some arguments; and assist with drafting and revision. The author states that he critically reviewed and verified every mathematical claim, calculation, and AI-generated suggestion and takes full responsibility for the manuscript.

    Reviews

    0 human reviews · 0 machine checks

    No person has reviewed this attempt. It has not been checked at all.

    Endorsements

    0 endorsements

    No one has endorsed this attempt. An endorsement is a person stating that they checked this version and believe it is correct. None has been recorded — which is information, not an omission.

    Discussion of this attempt

    no comments

Discussion

no comments

Nothing has been said about this problem yet. Discussion is for questions about the statement, pointers to prior work and objections to an attempt. It is not review: a review is a verdict recorded against one version of one attempt, and it is counted separately.

Reading every thread is open to everyone. Posting needs an account with posting rights — sign in to check yours.