Magnetohydrodynamics approximation of the compressible full magneto- micropolar system

Jishan Fan; Tohru Ozawa; Jishan Fan; Tohru Ozawa

doi:10.3934/math.2022878

AIMS Mathematics

2022, Volume 7, Issue 9: 16037-16053. doi: 10.3934/math.2022878

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

Magnetohydrodynamics approximation of the compressible full magneto- micropolar system

Jishan Fan ¹,
Tohru Ozawa ^{2
,
,}

1.
Department of Applied Mathematics, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
2.
Department of Applied Physics, Waseda University, Tokyo, 169-8555, Japan

Received: 23 May 2022 Revised: 14 June 2022 Accepted: 20 June 2022 Published: 30 June 2022
MSC : 35B25, 35Q60, 76W05

In this paper, we will use the Banach fixed point theorem to prove the uniform-in- $\epsilon$ existence of the compressible full magneto-micropolar system in a bounded smooth domain, where $\epsilon$ is the dielectric constant. Consequently, the limit as $\epsilon\rightarrow0$ can be established. This approximation is usually referred to as the magnetohydrodynamics approximation and is equivalent to the neglect of the displacement current.

Keywords:

Citation: Jishan Fan, Tohru Ozawa. Magnetohydrodynamics approximation of the compressible full magneto- micropolar system[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 16037-16053. doi: 10.3934/math.2022878

Related Papers:

[1]	Habib ur Rehman, Wiyada Kumam, Poom Kumam, Meshal Shutaywi . A new weak convergence non-monotonic self-adaptive iterative scheme for solving equilibrium problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(6): 5612-5638. doi: 10.3934/math.2021332
[2]	Habib ur Rehman, Poom Kumam, Kanokwan Sitthithakerngkiet . Viscosity-type method for solving pseudomonotone equilibrium problems in a real Hilbert space with applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(2): 1538-1560. doi: 10.3934/math.2021093
[3]	Fei Ma, Jun Yang, Min Yin . A strong convergence theorem for solving pseudo-monotone variational inequalities and fixed point problems using subgradient extragradient method in Banach spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 5015-5028. doi: 10.3934/math.2022279
[4]	Lu-Chuan Ceng, Yeong-Cheng Liou, Tzu-Chien Yin . On Mann-type accelerated projection methods for pseudomonotone variational inequalities and common fixed points in Banach spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 21138-21160. doi: 10.3934/math.20231077
[5]	Bancha Panyanak, Chainarong Khunpanuk, Nattawut Pholasa, Nuttapol Pakkaranang . A novel class of forward-backward explicit iterative algorithms using inertial techniques to solve variational inequality problems with quasi-monotone operators. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(4): 9692-9715. doi: 10.3934/math.2023489
[6]	Yali Zhao, Qixin Dong, Xiaoqing Huang . A self-adaptive viscosity-type inertial algorithm for common solutions of generalized split variational inclusion and paramonotone equilibrium problem. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(2): 4504-4523. doi: 10.3934/math.2025208
[7]	Doaa Filali, Mohammad Dilshad, Mohammad Akram . Generalized variational inclusion: graph convergence and dynamical system approach. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 24525-24545. doi: 10.3934/math.20241194
[8]	Lu-Chuan Ceng, Shih-Hsin Chen, Yeong-Cheng Liou, Tzu-Chien Yin . Modified inertial subgradient extragradient algorithms for generalized equilibria systems with constraints of variational inequalities and fixed points. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 13819-13842. doi: 10.3934/math.2024672
[9]	Austine Efut Ofem, Jacob Ashiwere Abuchu, Godwin Chidi Ugwunnadi, Hossam A. Nabwey, Abubakar Adamu, Ojen Kumar Narain . Double inertial steps extragadient-type methods for solving optimal control and image restoration problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 12870-12905. doi: 10.3934/math.2024629
[10]	Na Mi, Juhe Sun, Li Wang, Yu Liu . Alternating direction method for the fixed point problem of set-valued mappings with second-order cone double constraints. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(3): 6389-6406. doi: 10.3934/math.2023323

Abstract

1. Introduction

In this paper, we consider the three-dimensional magneto-micropolar fluid equations with fractional dissipation

$\begin{equation} \left\{ \begin{array}{l} { \partial_{t}u+\mu (-\Delta)^{\alpha} u-\chi\Delta u+u\cdot\nabla u-b\cdot\nabla b+\nabla p-2\chi\nabla\times v = 0, }\\ { \partial_{t}v+\eta (-\Delta)^{\beta} v-\kappa\nabla\nabla\cdot v+4\chi v+u\cdot\nabla v-2\chi\nabla\times u = 0, }\\ { \partial_{t}b+\lambda (-\Delta)^{\gamma} b+u\cdot\nabla b-b\cdot\nabla u = 0, }\\ { \nabla\cdot u = 0, \nabla\cdot b = 0, }\\ \end{array} \right. \end{equation}$

(1.1)

with an initial value

$\begin{equation} t = 0: u = u_0(x), \; \; v = v_0(x), \; \; b = b_0(x), \; \; x\in \mathbb{R}^{3}. \end{equation}$

(1.2)

Here $u = u(x, t)$ , $v = v(x, t)$ , $b = b(x, t)\in \mathbb{R}^{3}$ , and $p = p(x, t)\in \mathbb{R}$ are the velocity, micro-rotational velocity, magnetic fields, and scalar pressure, respectively. $\mu$ , $\chi$ , and $\frac{1}{\lambda}$ represent the kinematic viscosity, vortex viscosity, and magnetic Reynolds number, respectively. $\eta$ and $\kappa$ are angular viscosities. $\alpha$ , $\beta$ and $\gamma$ are the parameters of the fractional dissipations corresponding to the velocity, micro-rotational velocity and magnetic field, respectively. The fractional Laplace operator $(-\Delta)^\alpha$ is defined through the Fourier transform as

$\begin{equation*} \widehat{(-\Delta)^\alpha f}(\xi) = \widehat{\Lambda ^{2\alpha }f} = |\xi|^{2\alpha}\hat f(\xi). \end{equation*}$

The incompressible magneto-micropolar fluid equations have made analytic studies a great challenge but offer new opportunities due to their distinctive mathematical features. Regularity criteria for weak solutions are established by Fan and Zhong ^[1] in pointwise multipliers for $1\leq \alpha = \beta = \gamma\leq \frac{5}{4}$ . Local and global well-posedness have been established in ^[2,3,4], respectively. For $\alpha = \beta = \gamma = 1$ , we refer to ^[5,6,7] for the existence of strong solutions and weak solutions, respectively. In the study field of the magneto-micropolar fluid equations, regularity criteria for weak solutions and blow-up criteria for smooth solutions are very important topics. The readers may refer to regularity criteria of weak solutions in Morrey-Campanato space ^[8], in Lorentz space ^[9], Besov space ^[10], Triebel-Lizorkin space ^[11] and other regularity criteria for weak solutions ^{[12,13,14,15]}, and ^[16,17] for blow-up criteria of smooth solutions in different function spaces, respectively. Serrin-type regularity criteria for weak solutions via the velocity fields and the gradient of the velocity field were established in Yuan ^[13], respectively. We may refer to ^[18,19,20] for global well-posedness. On the other hand, the global regularity of weak solutions to (1.1) with partial viscosities becomes more complex. In the case of 2D, we may refer to ^{[22,23,24,25]}, and in the case of 3D, we may refer to ^[26,27].

If $v = 0$ and $\chi = 0$ , then (1.1) reduces to MHD equations with fractional dissipation. The MHD equations govern the dynamics of the velocity and magnetic fields in electrically conducting fluids such as plasmas, liquid metals, and salt water. We only recall regularity criteria for our purpose. If $\alpha, \beta > \frac{5}{4}$ , some regularity criteria have been established by Wu ^[28,29], which are given in terms of the velocity $u$ . If $1\leq \alpha = \beta\leq \frac{3}{2}$ , Zhou ^[30] obtained the Serrin-type criteria $u\in L^p_TL^q_x$ with $\frac{2\alpha}{p}+\frac{3}{q}\leq 2\alpha-1$ and $\frac{3}{2\alpha-1} < q\leq\infty$ . Later, Yuan ^[14] extended the above function space $L^q$ to $B^s_{q, \infty}$ . Recently, the regularity criterion involving $u_3, b \in L^\omega_TL^q_x$ is given in ^[31]. We also refer to ^[32,33] for well-posedness and ^[34] for blow up criterion of smooth solutions.

Motivated by the Serrin-type regularity criterion of weak solutions to Navier-Stokes equations ^[35,36] and MHD equations ^[30,31]. The main purpose is to investigate the regularity criterion of weak solutions to the systems (1.1) and (1.2) in this paper and establish the Serrin-type regularity criterion of weak solutions involving partial components. We state our main result as follows:

Theorem 1.1. Let $1\le\alpha = \beta = \gamma \le \frac{3}{2}$ and $\chi, \kappa\geq 0$ . Assume that $(u_0, v_0, b_0)\in H^1(\mathbb{R}^3)$ and $\nabla\cdot u_0 = \nabla\cdot b_0 = 0$ . Furthermore, if

$\begin{equation*} u_3, v, b \in L^{\varrho} (0, T;L^{q}(\mathbb{R}^3)), \end{equation*}$

with

$\begin{equation} \frac{2\alpha }{\varrho} + \frac{3}{q} \le \frac{3}{4} (2\alpha-1 )+\frac{3(1-\epsilon )}{4q}, \ \ \frac{3+\epsilon }{2\alpha -1} < q\le \infty , \ \ 0 < \epsilon\le \frac{1}{3}, \end{equation}$

(1.3)

then the solution $(u, v, b)$ to the systems (1.1) and (1.2) remains smooth on $\big [0, T \big]$ .

Remark 1.2. Since the concrete values of the constants $\mu$ , $\eta$ , and $\lambda$ play no role in our proof, for this reason, we shall assume them to be all equal to one throughout this paper. For convenience of description, we define horizontal derivatives $\nabla_h: = (\partial_{1}, \partial_{2})$ .

Remark 1.3. When $v = 0$ and $\chi = 0$ , the conclusion in Theorem 1.1 is reduced to the one in ^[31].

Remark 1.4. Compared with ^[31], the main difficulty in this paper comes from the nonlinear term $u\cdot\nabla v$ . In order to overcome the difficulty caused by the nonlinear term, owing to the energy functional (see (2.2)), we first use integrating by parts and $\nabla\cdot u = 0$ to transform it into a control of the horizontal derivative, and then use Hölder's inequality, multiplicative Sobolev inequality, the Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality, and Young's inequality to control the nonlinear term.

2. Proof of main result

In this section, our main purpose is to complete the proof of Theorem 1.1. To this end, we introduce the following lemma:

Lemma 2.1. (^[37]) The multiplicative Sobolev inequality

$\begin{equation} \|\nabla u\|_{L^{3q}}\le C\|\partial_1\nabla u\|_{L^2}^{\frac{1}{3}} \|\partial_2\nabla u\|_{L^2}^{\frac{1}{3}} \|\partial_3\nabla u\|_{L^q}^{\frac{1}{3}}, \ \ 1\le q < \infty, \end{equation}$

(2.1)

holds.

In what follows, we prove Theorem 1.1.

Proof. Let

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} E(t) : = & \|\nabla _hu(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla _hv(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla _hb(t)\|_{L^2}^2+ \int_0^t(\|\nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2+\\ & \|\nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } v(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } b(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2)d\tau+ \kappa\int_0^t\|\nabla _h \nabla\cdot v(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2d\tau. \end{split} \end{equation}$

(2.2)

The proof is divided into two cases: $\frac{3+\epsilon }{2\alpha -1} < q < \infty$ and $q = \infty$ . We first consider the case $\frac{3+\epsilon }{2\alpha -1} < q < \infty$ .

Taking the inner product of the first three equations of (1.1) with $(u, v, b)$ , and adding them up, using integrating by parts, the divergence-free condition, and Cauchy inequality, we obtain

$\begin{equation*} \label{5} \begin{split} & \frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}(\|u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|v(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|b(t)\|_{L^2}^2) +\|\Lambda ^{\alpha } u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\Lambda ^{\alpha } v(t)\|_{L^2}^2 \\ & +\|\Lambda ^{\alpha } b(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\kappa\|\nabla\cdot v(t)\|_{L^2}^2 \leq 0. \end{split} \end{equation*}$

Integrating the above inequality with respect to $t$ and then obtaining

$\begin{equation*} \begin{split} & \|u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|v(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|b(t)\|_{L^2}^2 +2\int^t_0(\|\Lambda ^{\alpha } u(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\Lambda ^{\alpha } v(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2 \\ & +\|\Lambda ^{\alpha } b(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2+\kappa\|\nabla\cdot v(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2)d\tau \leq \|u_0\|_{L^2}^2+\|v_0\|_{L^2}^2+\|b_0\|_{L^2}^2. \end{split} \end{equation*}$

By multiplying the first three equations of (1.1) by $\Delta_hu$ , $\Delta_hv$ , and $\Delta_hb$ , respectively, and adding them up, using integrating by parts and the divergence-free condition, we have

$\begin{eqnarray} &&\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}(\|\nabla _hu(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla _hv(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla _hb(t)\|_{L^2}^2) +\|\nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } v(t)\|_{L^2}^2 \\ && +\|\nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } b(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\kappa\|\nabla _h \nabla\cdot v(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\chi\|\nabla _h\nabla u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+ 4\chi\|\nabla _hv\|_{L^2}^2 \\ & : = & \sum\limits_{i = 1}^6I_i, \end{eqnarray}$

(2.3)

where

$\begin{eqnarray} \label{} I_1 & = &\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}(u\cdot\nabla u)\cdot\Delta_hu\;dx, \\ I_2& = &-\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}(b\cdot\nabla b)\cdot\Delta_hu\;dx, \\ I_3& = &\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}(u\cdot\nabla b)\cdot\Delta_hb\;dx, \\ I_4& = &-\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}(b\cdot\nabla u)\cdot\Delta_hb\;dx, \\ I_5& = &\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}(u\cdot\nabla v)\cdot\Delta_hv\;dx, \\ I_6& = &-2\chi \int_{\mathbb{R}^3}[(\nabla \times v)\cdot\Delta_h u + (\nabla \times u) \cdot\Delta_h v]\;dx. \end{eqnarray}$

Thanks to integration by parts and Cauchy's inequality, we arrive at

$\begin{eqnarray} I_6 & = & 4\chi\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \nabla_h(\nabla \times u) \cdot \nabla_h v\;dx \\ &\leq & \chi\|\nabla_h (\nabla \times u)\|^2_{L^2}+4\chi\|\nabla_hv\|^2_{L^2} \\ & = & \chi\|\nabla_h \nabla u\|^2_{L^2}+4\chi\|\nabla_hv\|^2_{L^2}. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.4)

For $I_1$ , we divide it into the following three items: $I_{1i}(i = 1, 2, 3)$ as

$\begin{eqnarray} I_1 & = & \sum\limits_{j, k = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}u_j\partial_j u_k\Delta_hu_k\;dx +\sum\limits_{j = 1}^3\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}u_j\partial_j u_3\Delta_hu_3\;dx+ \\ && \sum\limits_{k = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}u_3\partial_3 u_k\Delta_hu_k\;dx \\ &: = & I_{11}+ I_{12}+ I_{13}. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.5)

The divergence-free condition and integration by parts entail that

$\begin{eqnarray} I_{11}& = &\sum\limits_{i, j, k = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}u_j\partial_j u_k\partial^2_{ii}u_k\;dx\\& = & -\sum\limits_{i, j, k = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{i}u_j\partial_j u_k\partial_{i}u_k\;dx+\frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_{i, j, k = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{j}u_j|\partial_i u_k|^2\;dx\\& = & -\sum\limits_{i, j, k = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{i}u_j\partial_j u_k\partial_{i}u_k\;dx-\frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_{i, k = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{3}u_3|\partial_i u_k|^2\;dx\\& = & -\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{1}u_1\partial_1 u_1\partial_{1}u_1\;dx-\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{1}u_1\partial_1 u_2\partial_{1}u_2\;dx-\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{1}u_2\partial_2 u_1\partial_{1}u_1\;dx\\&&-\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{1}u_2\partial_2 u_2\partial_{1}u_2\;dx-\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{2}u_1\partial_1 u_1\partial_{2}u_1\;dx-\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{2}u_1\partial_1 u_2\partial_{2}u_2\;dx\\&&-\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{2}u_2\partial_2 u_1\partial_{2}u_1\;dx-\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{2}u_2\partial_2 u_2\partial_{2}u_2\;dx-\frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_{i, k = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{3}u_3|\partial_i u_k|^2\;dx\\& = & -\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{1}u_1\partial_1 u_1\partial_{1}u_1\;dx-\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{2}u_2\partial_2 u_2\partial_{2}u_2\;dx+\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{3}u_3\partial_2 u_1\partial_{2}u_1\;dx\\&&+\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{3}u_3\partial_1 u_2\partial_{1}u_2\;dx+\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{3}u_3\partial_2 u_1\partial_{1}u_2\;dx-\frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_{i, k = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_{3}u_3|\partial_i u_k|^2\;dx\\& = & \frac{1}{2} \sum\limits_{j, k = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_3 u_3\partial_k u_j\partial_k u_j\;dx -\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_3 u_3\partial_1 u_1\partial_2 u_2\;dx +\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_3 u_3\partial_2 u_1\partial_1 u_2\;dx \\& = & -\sum\limits_{j, k = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} u_3\partial_{3k}^{2} u_j\partial_k u_j\;dx +\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} u_3(\partial_{32}^{2} u_2\partial_1 u_1+\partial_{31}^{2} u_1 \partial_2 u_2)\;dx \\&& -\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} u_3(\partial_{32}^{2} u_1\partial_1 u_2+\partial_{31}^{2} u_2 \partial_2 u_1)\;dx, \end{eqnarray}$

(2.6)

and

$\begin{eqnarray} I_{12} = - \sum\limits_{j = 1}^3\sum\limits_{l = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_l u_j\partial_j u_3\partial_l u_3\;dx = \sum\limits_{j = 1}^3\sum\limits_{l = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_l u_j u_3\partial_{jl}^{2} u_3\;dx. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.7)

Therefore, we obtain

$\begin{equation} |I_1|\le C\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |u_3||\nabla u||\nabla_h\nabla u|\;dx. \end{equation}$

(2.8)

From Hölder's inequality, Lemma 2.1, the Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality, and Young's inequality, it follows that

$\begin{eqnarray} |I_1| &\leq & C\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |u_3||\nabla u||\nabla_h\nabla u|\;dx \\ &\leq & C\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}\| \nabla u\|_{L^{\theta _1}} \|\nabla_h\nabla u\|_{L^{\theta _2}} \\ &\leq & C\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}\| \nabla_h\nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2}{3} } \| \Delta u\|_{L^{\frac{\theta _1}{3} } }^{\frac{1}{3} } \|\nabla_h\nabla u\|_{L^{\theta _2}} \\ &\leq & C\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}\| \nabla_h u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2s_1}{3} } \| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3} }\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{s_2}{3} } \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1-s_2}{3} }\| \nabla_h u\|_{L^{2} }^{s_3 } \| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{1-s_3 }\\ &\leq & C\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2s_1}{3} } \| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3} }\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{s_2}{3} } \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1-s_2}{3} }\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{s_3 } \| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{1-s_3 }\\ &\leq& C\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2s_1}{3}+\frac{s_2}{3}+s_3}\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1} u\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1-s_2}{3} }\| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3}+1-s_3 } \\ &\leq & C\big[ \|u_3\|_{L^{q}}\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2s_1}{3}+\frac{s_2}{3}+s_3 } \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1} u\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1-s_2}{3} } \big]^{m^{\prime }} +\frac{1}{6}\| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{(\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3}+1-s_3 )m}, \end{eqnarray}$

(2.9)

where the constants $1 < \theta _1, \theta _2, m, m^{\prime } < \infty$ and $0\le s_1, s_2, s_3\le1$ satisfy

$\begin{equation} \left\{ \begin{array}{l} { \frac{1}{\theta _1} + \frac{1}{\theta _2}+\frac{1}{q} = 1, }\\ { 2-\frac{3}{2} = \big(1-\frac{3}{2}\big) s_1+\big(1+\alpha-\frac{3}{2}\big) \big(1-s_1\big), }\\ { 2-\frac{3}{\theta_1/3} = \big(1-\frac{3}{2}\big) s_2+\big(1+\alpha-\frac{3}{2}\big)\big(1-s_2\big), }\\ { 2-\frac{3}{\theta_2} = \big(1-\frac{3}{2}\big) s_3+\big(1+\alpha-\frac{3}{2}\big)\big(1-s_3\big), }\\ { \frac{1}{m} + \frac{1}{m^{\prime }} = 1, }\\ { \big(\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3}+1-s_3\big)m = 2.} \end{array} \right. \end{equation}$

(2.10)

Noting that $1\le\alpha\le\dfrac{3}{2}$ and $\frac{3+\epsilon }{2\alpha -1} < q\le \infty$ , one solution to (2.10) can be written as

$\begin{equation} \left\{ \begin{array}{l} { \theta _1 = \frac{18q}{5q-18\epsilon}, }\\ { \theta _2 = \frac{18q}{13q-18(1-\epsilon)}, }\\ { s _1 = 1-\frac{1}{\alpha}, }\\ { s _2 = 1-\frac{9\epsilon}{\alpha q}, }\\ { s _3 = 1-\frac{1}{3\alpha}-\frac{3(1-\epsilon)}{\alpha q}, }\\ { m = \frac{2\alpha q}{q+3(1-\epsilon)}, }\\ { m^{\prime } = \frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)}.} \end{array} \right. \end{equation}$

(2.11)

To bound $I_3$ , we decompose it into three pieces as

$\begin{eqnarray} I_3& = &\sum\limits_{j, k = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}u_j\partial_j b_k\Delta_hb_k\;dx +\sum\limits_{j = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}u_j\partial_j b_3\Delta_hb_3\;dx+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^3\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}u_3\partial_3 b_k\Delta_h b_k\;dx \\&: = & I_{31}+ I_{32}+ I_{33}. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.12)

By using integrating by parts (see^[31]), we have

$\begin{eqnarray} I_{31}& = & \sum\limits_{j, k, l = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \big[\partial_{ll}^{2} u_j\partial_j b_k b_k +\partial_l u_j\partial_{lj}^{2} b_k b_k\big]\;dx - \\ && \frac{1}{2} \sum\limits_{j, k, l = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \big[\partial_{lj}^{2} u_j\partial_l b_k b_k +\partial_j u_j\partial_{ll}^{2} b_k b_k\big]\;dx. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.13)

Similarly, we have

$\begin{eqnarray} I_{32} & = & \sum\limits_{j, l = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \big[\partial_{ll}^{2} u_j\partial_j b_3 b_3 +\partial_l u_j\partial_{lj}^{2} b_3 b_3\big]\;dx -\\ && \frac{1}{2} \sum\limits_{j, k, l = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \big[\partial_{lj}^{2} u_j\partial_l b_3 b_3 +\partial_j u_j\partial_{ll}^{2} b_3 b_3\big]\;dx, \end{eqnarray}$

(2.14)

and

$\begin{eqnarray} I_{33} & = & \sum\limits_{k = 1}^3 \sum\limits_{l = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \big[\partial_{3l}^{2} u_3\partial_l b_k b_k +\partial_l u_3\partial_{3l}^{2} b_k b_k\big]\;dx +\\ && \frac{1}{2} \sum\limits_{k = 1}^3\sum\limits_{j, l = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \big[\partial_{lj}^{2} u_j\partial_l b_k b_k +\partial_j u_j\partial_{ll}^{2} b_k b_k\big]\;dx. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.15)

Collecting (2.13)–(2.15), it is easy to derive that

$\begin{equation} |I_3|\le C\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |b|(|\nabla u|+|\nabla b|)(|\nabla_h\nabla u|+|\nabla_h\nabla b|)\;dx. \end{equation}$

(2.16)

Furthermore, we have

$\begin{equation} |I_2+I_3+I_4|\le C\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |b|(|\nabla u|+|\nabla b|)(|\nabla_h\nabla u|+|\nabla_h\nabla b|)\;dx. \end{equation}$

(2.17)

Similar to (2.13), it follows from Hölder's inequality, Lemma 2.1, Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality, and Young's inequality that

$\begin{eqnarray} && |I_2+I_3+I_4| \\ &\le& C\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |b|(|\nabla u|+|\nabla b|)(|\nabla_h\nabla u|+|\nabla_h\nabla b|)\;dx \\ &\le& C\|b\|_{L^{q}}\| |\nabla u|+|\nabla b|\|_{L^{\theta _1}} \||\nabla_h\nabla u|+|\nabla_h\nabla b|\|_{L^{\theta _2}} \\ &\le& C\|b\|_{L^{q}}\big(\| \nabla_h\nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2}{3} } \| \Delta u\|_{L^{\frac{\theta _1}{3} } }^{\frac{1}{3} } +\| \nabla_h\nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2}{3} } \| \Delta b\|_{L^{\frac{\theta _1}{3} } }^{\frac{1}{3} }\big)\cdot\\ && \quad \big(\|\nabla_h\nabla u\|_{L^{\theta _2}}+\|\nabla_h\nabla b\|_{L^{\theta _2}} \big) \\ &\le& C\|b\|_{L^{q}}\Big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2s_1}{3} } \| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3} } \| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{s_2}{3} } \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1-s_2}{3} } + \\ && \quad\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2s_1}{3} } \| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } b\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3} } \| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{s_2}{3} } \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1-s_2}{3} }\Big)\cdot \\ && \quad \big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{s_3 } \| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{1-s_3 }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{s_3 } \| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } b\|_{L^{2} }^{1-s_3 }\big) \\ &\le& C\|b\|_{L^{q}} \big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2s_1}{3} } +\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2s_1}{3} }\big) \big(\| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3} }+\| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } b\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3} }\big)\cdot \\ &&\quad \big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{s_2}{3} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{s_2}{3} }\big) \big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1-s_2}{3} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1-s_2}{3} }\big)\cdot \\ &&\quad \big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{s_3 }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{s_3 }\big) \big(\| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{1-s_3 }+\| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } b\|_{L^{2} }^{1-s_3 }\big) \\ &\le& C\|b\|_{L^{q}} \big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{2s_1}{3}+\frac{s_2}{3}+s_3 } \big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{1-s_2}{3}}\cdot \\ &&\quad \big(\| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } b\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3}+1-s_3}\\ &\le& C\big [ \|b\|_{L^{q}}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{2s_1}{3}+\frac{s_2}{3}+s_3 } \big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{1-s_2}{3} } \big ]^{m^{\prime}}+\\ &&\quad \frac{1}{6}\big(\| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } b\|_{L^{2}}\big)^{\big(\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3}+1-s_3 \big)m}, \end{eqnarray}$

(2.18)

where the constants $1 < \theta _1, \theta _2, m, m^{\prime } < \infty$ and $0\le s_1, s_2, s_3\le1$ satisfy (2.10).

Similar to $I_3$ , we bound $I_5$ as

$\begin{equation} |I_5|\le C\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |v|(|\nabla u|+|\nabla v|)(|\nabla_h\nabla u|+|\nabla_h\nabla v|)\;dx. \end{equation}$

(2.19)

Using the same steps as (2.18), we obtain

$\begin{eqnarray} \label{22} |I_5| &\le& C\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |v|(|\nabla u|+|\nabla v|)(|\nabla_h\nabla u|+|\nabla_h\nabla v|)\;dx \\ &\le& C\big [ \|v\|_{L^{q}}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{2s_1}{3}+\frac{s_2}{3}+s_3 } \big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{1-s_2}{3} } \big ]^{m^{\prime}}+\\ &&\quad \frac{1}{6}\big(\| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } v\|_{L^{2}}\big)^{\big(\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3}+1-s_3 \big)m}, \end{eqnarray}$

where the constants $1 < \theta _1, \theta _2, m, m^{\prime } < \infty$ and $0\le s_1, s_2, s_3\le1$ satisfy (2.10).

Combining (2.3), (2.4), (2.9), (2.18), and (2.20), we arrive at

$\begin{eqnarray} &&\frac{d}{dt}(\|\nabla _hu(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla _hv(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla _hb(t)\|_{L^2}^2) +\|\nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\\ && \|\nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } v(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla _h\Lambda ^{\alpha } b(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\kappa\|\nabla _h \nabla\cdot v(t)\|_{L^2}^2\\ &\le& C\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)}} \| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2\big((2\alpha-1) q-3\big)}{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)}} \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{6\epsilon }{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)} } +\\ && \|b\|_{L^{q}}^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)}}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{2\big((2\alpha-1) q-3\big)}{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)} } \big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{6\epsilon }{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)} }+\\ && \|v\|_{L^{q}}^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)}}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{2\big((2\alpha-1) q-3\big)}{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)} } \big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{6\epsilon }{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)} }\\ &\le& C\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}\big)^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)}}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\\ && \| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{2\big((2\alpha-1) q-3\big)}{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)}}\big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{6\epsilon }{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)}}. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.20)

Set

$\begin{equation} \begin{array}{lll} { \Theta_1 = \frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)}, }\\ { \Theta_2 = \frac{2\big((2\alpha-1) q-3\big)}{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)}, }\\ { \Theta_3 = \frac{6\epsilon }{(2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)}.} \end{array} \end{equation}$

(2.21)

Integrating (2.20) with respect to $t$ , we obtain

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} E(t) &\le CJ_0+C \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}\big)^{\Theta_1} \big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\\ & \quad \| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\Theta_2}\big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\Theta_3}d\tau, \end{split} \end{equation}$

(2.22)

where $J_0 = \|\nabla u(0)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla v(0)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla b(0)\|_{L^2}^2$ .

By taking the inner product of the first three equations of (1.1) with $(-\Delta u, -\Delta v, -\Delta b)$ and integrating by parts, the divergence-free condition, we have

$\begin{eqnarray} && \frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}(\|\nabla u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla v(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla b(t)\|_{L^2}^2) +\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 }u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 }v(t)\|_{L^2}^2 +\\ && \|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\kappa\|\nabla \nabla\cdot v(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\chi\|\nabla \nabla u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+ 4\chi\|\nabla v(t)\|_{L^2}^2\\ &: = & \sum\limits_{i = 1}^6J_i, \end{eqnarray}$

(2.23)

where

$\begin{eqnarray} \label{} J_1& = &\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}(u\cdot\nabla u)\cdot\Delta u\;dx, \\ J_2& = &-\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}(b\cdot\nabla b)\cdot\Delta u\;dx, \\ J_3& = &\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}(u\cdot\nabla b)\cdot\Delta b\;dx, \\ J_4& = &-\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}(b\cdot\nabla u)\cdot\Delta b\;dx, \\ J_5& = &\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}(u\cdot\nabla v)\cdot\Delta v\;dx, \\ J_6& = &-2\chi \int_{\mathbb{R}^3}[(\nabla \times v)\cdot\Delta u + (\nabla \times u) \cdot\Delta v]\;dx. \end{eqnarray}$

By integration by parts and Cauchy's inequality, we arrive at

$\begin{eqnarray} J_6 & = & 4\chi\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \nabla(\nabla \times u) \cdot \nabla v\;dx \\ &\leq& \chi\|\nabla (\nabla \times u)\|^2_{L^2}+4\chi\|\nabla v\|^2_{L^2} \\ & = & \chi\|\nabla \nabla u\|^2_{L^2}+4\chi\|\nabla v\|^2_{L^2}. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.24)

For $J_1$ , we divide it into the following three items: $J_{1i}(i = 1, 2, 3)$

$\begin{eqnarray} J_1 & = &\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}u_3\partial_3 u\cdot\Delta_hu\;dx +\sum\limits_{j = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}u_j\partial_j u\cdot\Delta u\;dx+\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}u_3\partial_3 u\cdot \partial_{33}^{2} u\;dx \\ &: = & J_{11}+ J_{12}+ J_{13}. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.25)

Integrating by parts and using the divergence-free condition yields

$\begin{equation} J_{11} = \frac{1}{2} \sum\limits_{k = 1}^3\sum\limits_{l = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_3 u_3\partial_l u_k\partial_l u_k\;dx -\sum\limits_{k = 1}^3\sum\limits_{l = 1}^2\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_l u_3\partial_3 u_k\partial_l u_k\;dx, \end{equation}$

(2.26)

$\begin{equation} J_{12} = \frac{1}{2} \sum\limits_{j = 1}^3\sum\limits_{k, l = 1}^3\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_j u_j\partial_l u_k\partial_l u_k\;dx -\sum\limits_{j = 1}^2\sum\limits_{k, l = 1}^3\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_l u_j\partial_j u_k\partial_l u_k\;dx, \end{equation}$

(2.27)

and

$\begin{equation} J_{13} = \frac{1}{2} \sum\limits_{k = 1}^3\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}(\partial_1 u_1+\partial_2 u_2)\partial_3 u_k\partial_3 u_k\;dx. \end{equation}$

(2.28)

Therefore, we have

$\begin{equation} |J_1|\le C\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |\nabla_h u||\nabla u|^{2}\;dx. \end{equation}$

(2.29)

From Hölder's inequality and Lemma 2.1, it follows that

$\begin{eqnarray} |J_1| &\le & C\|\nabla_h u\|_{L^{2}}\| \nabla u\|_{L^4}^{2} \\ &\le& C\|\nabla_h u\|_{L^{2}}\| \nabla u\|_{L^2}^{2-\frac{3}{2\alpha}} \| \Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{6} }^{\frac{3}{2\alpha} } \\ &\le& C\|\nabla_h u\|_{L^{2}}\| \nabla u\|_{L^2}^{2-\frac{3}{2\alpha}} \| \nabla_h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1}{\alpha} }\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1}{2\alpha} }. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.30)

By using integrating by parts and the divergence-free condition, we have

$\begin{eqnarray} J_{3} & = & -\sum\limits_{j, k, l = 1}^3\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\partial_l (u_j\partial_j b_k)\partial_l b_k\;dx \\ & = & -\sum\limits_{j, k, l = 1}^3\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} (\partial_l u_j\partial_j b_k\partial_l b_k+u_j\partial_{lj}^{2} b_k\partial_l b_k)\;dx \\ & = & \sum\limits_{j, k, l = 1}^3\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}b_k\partial_l (\partial_lu_j\partial_j b_k)\;dx\\ & = & \sum\limits_{j, k, l = 1}^3\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} (b_k\partial_{ll}^{2} u_j\partial_j b_k+b_k\partial_l u_j\partial_{jl}^{2} b_k)\;dx. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.31)

Then we arrive at

$\begin{equation} |J_3|\le C\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |b|(|\nabla u|+|\nabla b|)(|\Delta u|+|\Delta b|)\;dx. \end{equation}$

(2.32)

Furthermore, we have

$\begin{equation} |J_2+J_3+J_4|\le C\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |b|(|\nabla u|+|\nabla b|)(\Delta u|+|\Delta b|)\;dx. \end{equation}$

(2.33)

It follows from the same procedure (2.18) that

$\begin{eqnarray} && |J_2+J_3+J_4| \\ &\le& C\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |b|(|\nabla u|+|\nabla b|)(|\Delta u|+|\Delta b|)\;dx \\ &\le& C\|b\|_{L^{q}}\| |\nabla u|+|\nabla b|\|_{L^{\theta _1}} \||\Delta u|+|\Delta b|\|_{L^{\theta _2}} \\ &\le& C\|b\|_{L^{q}}\big(\| \Delta u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2}{3} } \| \Delta u\|_{L^{\frac{\theta _1}{3}}}^{\frac{1}{3} } +\| \Delta b\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2}{3} } \| \Delta b\|_{L^{\frac{\theta _1}{3} } }^{\frac{1}{3}}\big) \big(\|\Delta u\|_{L^{\theta _2}}+\|\Delta b\|_{L^{\theta _2}} \big) \\ &\le& C\|b\|_{L^{q}}\Big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2s_1}{3}} \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3} } \| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{s_2}{3} } \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1-s_2}{3}} +\\ && \| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2s_1}{3} } \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3} } \| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{s_2}{3} } \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1-s_2}{3} }\Big)\times \\ && \big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{s_3 } \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{1-s_3 }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{s_3 } \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }^{1-s_3 }\big) \\ &\le & C\|b\|_{L^{q}} \big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{2s_1}{3}+\frac{s_2}{3}+s_3 } \big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{2(1-s_1)}{3}+\frac{1-s_2}{3}+1-s_3 }\\ &\le& C\|b\|_{L^{q}}^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}} \big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{2}+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{2}\big) +\frac{1}{8}\big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2}+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }^{2}\big), \end{eqnarray}$

(2.34)

where the constants $1 < \theta _1, \theta _2, m, m^{\prime } < \infty$ and $0\le s_1, s_2, s_3\le1$ satisfy (2.10).

Similar to $J_3$ , we bound $J_5$ as

$\begin{equation} |J_5|\le C\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |v|(|\nabla u|+|\nabla v|)(|\Delta u|+|\Delta v|)\;dx. \end{equation}$

(2.35)

The same procedure leads to (2.34) yields

$\begin{eqnarray} \label{38} |J_5| &\le& C\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |v|(|\nabla u|+|\nabla v|)(|\Delta u|+|\Delta v|)\;dx \\ &\le& C\|v\|_{L^{q}}^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}} \big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{2}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }^{2}\big) +\frac{1}{8}\big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2}+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1} v\|_{L^{2}}^{2}\big). \end{eqnarray}$

Combining (2.23), (2.24), (2.30), (2.34), and (2.36), we have

$\begin{eqnarray} && \frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}(\|\nabla u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla v(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla b(t)\|_{L^2}^2) +\frac{3}{4}(\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v(t)\|_{L^2}^2)\\ && +\frac{3}{4}\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1}b(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\kappa\|\nabla \nabla\cdot v(t)\|_{L^2}^2\\ &\le& C(\|b\|_{L^{q}}^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}}) \big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{2}+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{2}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }^{2}\big)+ \\ && C\|\nabla_h u\|_{L^{2}}\| \nabla u\|_{L^2}^{2-\frac{3}{2\alpha}} \| \nabla_h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1}{\alpha} }\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1}{2\alpha}}. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.36)

Integrating (2.36) over the interval $(0, t)$ and using Hölder's inequality, it was deduced that

$\begin{eqnarray} && \frac{1}{2}(\|\nabla u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla v(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla b(t)\|_{L^2}^2)+ \frac{3}{4}\int_0^t(\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2+\\ && \|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2)d\tau +\int_0^t\kappa\|\nabla \nabla\cdot v(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2d\tau \\ &\le& C+ C\int_0^t(\|b\|_{L^{q}}^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}}) \big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{2}+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{2}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }^{2}\big) d\tau +\\ && C \int_0^t\|\nabla_h u\|_{L^{2}}\| \nabla u\|_{L^2}^{2-\frac{3}{2\alpha}} \| \nabla_h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1}{\alpha} }\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1}{2\alpha} } d\tau \\ &\le& C+ C\int_0^t(\|b\|_{L^{q}}^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}}) \big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{2}+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{2}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }^{2}\big) d\tau+\\ && C\sup\limits_{0\leq\tau\leq t}\|\nabla_h u\|_{L^{2}} \int_0^t\| \nabla u\|_{L^2}^{2-\frac{3}{2\alpha}} \| \nabla_h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1}{\alpha} }\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1}{2\alpha} } d\tau. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.37)

From Young's inequality, it follows that

$\begin{eqnarray} && C\sup\limits_{0\leq\tau\leq t}\|\nabla_h u\|_{L^{2}} \int_0^t\| \nabla u\|_{L^2}^{2-\frac{3}{2\alpha}} \| \nabla_h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1}{\alpha} }\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{1}{2\alpha} } d\tau \\ &\le& C\sup\limits_{0\leq\tau\leq t}\|\nabla_h u\|_{L^{2}} \big[ \int_0^t \| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau\big]^{1-\frac{3}{4\alpha}} \big[ \int_0^t \| \nabla_h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau\big]^{\frac{1}{2\alpha}}\big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau\big]^{\frac{1}{4\alpha}} \\ &\le& C\sup\limits_{0\leq\tau\leq t}\|\nabla_h u\|_{L^{2}} \big[ \int_0^t \| u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2\alpha}{1+\alpha}} \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{\frac{2}{1+\alpha}} d\tau\big]^{1-\frac{3}{4\alpha}} \big[ \int_0^t \| \nabla_h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau\big]^{\frac{1}{2\alpha}}\big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau\big]^{\frac{1}{4\alpha}} \\ &\le & C\sup\limits_{0\leq\tau\leq t}\|\nabla_h u\|_{L^{2}} \big[ \int_0^t \| \nabla_h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau\big]^{\frac{1}{2\alpha}}\big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau\big]^{\frac{1}{4\alpha}+\frac{4\alpha-3}{4\alpha(1+\alpha)}} \\ &\le& C\sup\limits_{0\leq\tau\leq t}\|\nabla_h u\|_{L^{2}} \big[ \big( \int_0^t \| \nabla_h\Lambda ^{\alpha } u\|_{L^{2}}^{2} d\tau\big)^{\frac{1}{2}} +1\big]\big[\big( \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2}}^{2} d\tau\big)^{\frac{1}{4}}+1 \big] \\ &\le& CE(t)\big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2}}^{2} d\tau \big]^{\frac{1}{4}}+C\sup\limits_{0\leq\tau\leq t}\|\nabla_h u\|_{L^{2}} \big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau \big]^{\frac{1}{4}}+\\ && CE(t)+C\sup\limits_{0\leq\tau\leq t}\|\nabla_h u\|_{L^{2}}\\ &\le & CE(t)\big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau \big]^{\frac{1}{4}}+C\big( \sup\limits_{0\leq\tau\leq t}\|\nabla_h u\|^{2}_{L^{2}}+1 \big) \big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2}}^{2} d\tau \big]^{\frac{1}{4}} +\\ && CE(t)+C\sup\limits_{0\leq\tau\leq t}\|\nabla_h u\|^{2}_{L^{2}}+C \\ &\le& CE(t)\big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2}}^{2} d\tau \big]^{\frac{1}{4}}+C \big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1} u\|_{L^{2}}^{2} d\tau \big]^{\frac{1}{4}}+CE(t)+C. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.38)

Then, we have

(2.39)

By using Hölder's inequality, Young's inequality, and (2.22), we deduce that

$\begin{eqnarray} CE(t)&\le& C+C \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}\big)^{\Theta_1}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\\ && \| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\Theta_2}\big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1} v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\Theta_3} d\tau \\ &\le& C+C\big[ \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}\big)^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\\ && \| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2} d\tau \big]^{\Theta_2} \big[ \int_0^t\big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2 }d\tau\big]^{\frac{1}{2}\Theta_3} \\ &\le& C+C \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}\big)^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2} d\tau + \\ && \frac{1}{16} \int_0^t\big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2 }d\tau. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.40)

Similarly, it follows from (2.22) and Hölder's inequality and Young's inequality that

$\begin{eqnarray} && CE(t)\big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau \big]^{\frac{1}{4}} \\ &\le& C\big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau \big]^{\frac{1}{4}}+C\big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau \big]^{\frac{1}{4}}\int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}+\\ && \|v\|_{L^{q}}\big)^{\Theta_1}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\frac{\Theta_2}{2}}\big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{\Theta_3}d\tau\\ &\le & C\big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau \big]^{\frac{1}{4}}+C\big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau \big]^{\frac{1}{4}}\big[ \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}+\\ && \|v\|_{L^{q}}\big)^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2} d\tau \big] ^{\frac{\Theta_2}{2}}\big[ \int_0^t\big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\\ && \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2 }d\tau\big]^{\frac{\Theta_3}{2}} \\ &\le& C\big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau \big]^{\frac{1}{4}}+C\big[ \int_0^t\big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2 }d\tau\big]^{\frac{2\Theta_3+1}{4}}\cdot \\ &&\big[ \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}\big)^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2} d\tau \big] ^{\Theta_2}\\ &\le& C\big[ \int_0^t \| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2} d\tau \big]^{\frac{1}{4}}+C\big[ \int_0^t\big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2 }d\tau\big]^{\frac{2\Theta_3+1}{4}}\cdot\\ &&\big[ \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}\big)^{\Theta_4}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2} d\tau \big] ^{\frac{3(2\alpha-1)q+3(1-\epsilon)-12}{4\big[ (2\alpha-1)q-3(1-\epsilon)\big] } } \\ &\le& C+C \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}\big)^{\Theta_4}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\\ && \| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2} d\tau + \frac{1}{16} \int_0^t\big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2 }d\tau, \end{eqnarray}$

(2.41)

where $\Theta_4 = \frac{8\alpha q}{3(2\alpha-1)q+3(1-\epsilon)-12}.$

We substitute (2.40) and (2.41) into (2.39) and then use Young's inequality to obtain

$\begin{eqnarray} && \frac{1}{2}(\|\nabla u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla v(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla b(t)\|_{L^2}^2)+\frac{3}{4}\int_0^t(\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2+\\ &&\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2)d\tau+\int_0^t\kappa\|\nabla \nabla\cdot v(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2d\tau \\ &\le& C+ C\int_0^t(\|b\|_{L^{q}}^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}}) \big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }^{2}+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2} }^{2}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }^{2}\big) d\tau+\\ && C \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}\big)^{\Theta_4}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2} d\tau +\\ && C \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}\big)^{\frac{2\alpha q}{(2\alpha-1)q-3}}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2} d\tau +\\ && \frac{1}{8}\big[ \int_0^t\big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2}d\tau\big]\\ &\le& C+C \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}^{\Theta_4}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}^{\Theta_4}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}^{\Theta_4}\big)\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2} d\tau +\\ && \frac{1}{4} \int_0^t\big(\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u\|_{L^{2} }^{2}+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b\|_{L^{2} }^{2}+\| \Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v\|_{L^{2} }^{2}\big) d\tau. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.42)

Then we have

$\begin{eqnarray} && \|\nabla u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla v(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla b(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\int_0^t(\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2+\\ && \|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2)d\tau+\int_0^t\kappa\|\nabla \nabla\cdot v(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2d\tau \\ &\le& C+C \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}^{\Theta_4}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}^{\Theta_4}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}^{\Theta_4}\big)\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2} d\tau. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.43)

Thanks to Gronwall's inequality and condition (1.3), we obtain

$\begin{eqnarray} && \|\nabla u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla v(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla b(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\int_0^t(\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2+\\ && \|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2)d\tau+\int_0^t\kappa\|\nabla \nabla\cdot v(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2d\tau \\ &\le& C\exp \big[ C \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{q}}^{\Theta_4}+\|b\|_{L^{q}}^{\Theta_4}+\|v\|_{L^{q}}^{\Theta_4}\big)d\tau \big] < \infty. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.44)

Finally, we consider the case $q = \infty$ . By repeating the above procedure, we derive that

$\begin{equation*} \label{48} E(t) \le CJ_0+C \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{\infty}}+\|b\|_{L^{\infty}}+\|v\|_{L^{\infty}}\big)^{\frac{2\alpha }{2\alpha-1}}\big(\| \nabla u\|_{L^{2} }+\| \nabla b\|_{L^{2}}+\| \nabla v\|_{L^{2} }\big)^{2 }d\tau. \end{equation*}$

Thanks to Gronwall's inequality and condition (1.3), we obtain

$\begin{eqnarray} && \|\nabla u(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla v(t)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\nabla b(t)\|_{L^2}^2 +\int_0^t(\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } u(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2+\\ && \|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } v(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2+\|\Lambda ^{\alpha+1 } b(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2)d\tau +\int_0^t\kappa\|\nabla \nabla\cdot v(\tau)\|_{L^2}^2d\tau \\ &\le& C\exp \big[ C \int_0^t\big(\|u_3\|_{L^{\infty}}^{\frac{8\alpha }{3(2\alpha-1)}}+\|b\|_{L^{\infty}}^{\frac{8\alpha }{3(2\alpha-1)}}+\|v\|_{L^{\infty}}^{\frac{8\alpha }{3(2\alpha-1)}}\big)d\tau\big ] < \infty. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.45)

By the above steps, we establish a higher-order a priori estimate of the solutions, and then we obtain that the higher-order norm of the solutions is bounded, thus proving the smoothness of the solutions. This completes the proof of Theorem 1.1.

3. Conclusions

In this paper, the regularity criterion of the weak solution of the three-dimensional magnetic micropolar fluid equation when $1\le\alpha = \beta = \gamma \le \frac{3}{2}$ is studied. However, the regularity of the weak solution of the magnetic micropolar fluid equation when $1\le\alpha, \beta, \gamma \le \frac{3}{2}$ on $\mathbb{R}^3$ is still an open problem, and it is hoped that the method in this paper can provide inspiration for the solution of this problem.

Use of AI tools declaration

The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by [the Basic Research Project of Key Scientific Research Project Plan of Universities in Henan Province (Grant No. 20ZX002)].

Conflict of interest

The authors declare there is no conflict of interest.

References

[1]	G. Łukaszewicz, Micropolar fluids: theory and applications, Boston: Birkhäuser, 1999.
[2]	S. Kawashima, Smooth global solutions for two-dimensional equations of electro-magneto-fluid dynamics, Japan J. Appl. Math., 1 (1984), 207. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03167869 doi: 10.1007/BF03167869
[3]	S. Kawashima, Y. Shizuta, Magnetohydrodynamic approximation of the complete equations for an electromagnetic fluid, Tsukuba J. Math., 10 (1986), 131–149. https://doi.org/10.21099/tkbjm/1496160397 doi: 10.21099/tkbjm/1496160397
[4]	S. Kawashima, Y. Shizuta, Magnetohydrodynamic approximation of the complete equations for an electromagnetic fluid II, Proc. Japan Acad. Ser. A Math. Sci., 62 (1986), 181–184. https://doi.org/10.3792/pjaa.62.181 doi: 10.3792/pjaa.62.181
[5]	S. Jiang, F. C. Li, Rigorous derivation of the compressible magnetohydrodynamic equations from the electromagnetic fluid system, Nonlinearity, 25 (2012), 1735–1752. https://doi.org/10.1088/0951-7715/25/6/1735 doi: 10.1088/0951-7715/25/6/1735
[6]	S. Jiang, F. C. Li, Convergence of the complete electromagnetic fluid system to the full compressible magnetohydrodynamic equations, 2013, arXiv: 1309.3668.
[7]	A. Milani, On a singular perturbation problem for the linear Maxwell equations, Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Politec. Torino, 38 (1980), 99–110.
[8]	A. Milani, Local in time existence for the complete Maxwell equations with monotone characteristic in a bounded domain, Annali di Matematica pura ed applicata, 131 (1982), 233–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01765154 doi: 10.1007/BF01765154
[9]	A. Milani, The quasi-stationary Maxwell equations as singular limit of the complete equations: the quasi-linear case, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 102 (1984), 251–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-247X(84)90218-X doi: 10.1016/0022-247X(84)90218-X
[10]	M. Stedry, O. Vejvoda, Small time-periodic solutions of equations of magnetohydrodynamics as a singularity perturbed problem, Aplikace matematiky, 28 (1983), 344–356. https://doi.org/10.21136/am.1983.104046 doi: 10.21136/am.1983.104046
[11]	M. Stedry, O. Vejvoda, Equations of magnetohydrodynamics of compressible fluid: periodic solutions, Aplikace matematiky, 30 (1985), 77–91. https://doi.org/10.21136/am.1985.104130 doi: 10.21136/am.1985.104130
[12]	M. Stedry, O. Vejvoda, Equations of magnetohydrodynamics: periodic solutions, Časopis pro pěstováni matematiky, 111 (1986), 177–184. https://doi.org/10.21136/cpm.1986.118275
[13]	D. Lauerová, The Rothe method and time periodic solutions to the Navier-Stokes equations and equations of magnetohydrodynamics, Aplikace matematiky, 35 (1990), 89–98. https://doi.org/10.21136/am.1990.104392 doi: 10.21136/am.1990.104392
[14]	F. Li, Y. Mu, Low Mach number limit of the full compressible Navier-Stokes-Maxwell system, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 412 (2014), 334–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2013.10.064 doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2013.10.064
[15]	R. Wei, B. Guo, Y. Li, Global existence and optimal convergence rates of solutions for 3D compressible magneto-micropolar fluid equations, J. Differ. Equations, 263 (2017), 2457–2480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2017.04.002 doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2017.04.002
[16]	Z. Wu, W. Wang, The pointwise estimates of diffusion wave of the compressible micropolar fluids, J. Differ. Equations, 265 (2018), 2544–2576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2018.04.039 doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2018.04.039
[17]	P. Zhang, Blow-up criterion for 3D compressible viscous magneto-micropolar fluids with initial vacuum, Bound. Value Probl., 2013 (2013), 160. https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-2770-2013-160 doi: 10.1186/1687-2770-2013-160
[18]	C. Jia, Z. Tan, J. Zhou, Well-posedness of compressible magneto-micropolar fluid equations, 2019, arXiv: 1906.06848v2.
[19]	Z. Song, The global well-posedness for the 3-D compressible micropolar system in the critical Besov space, Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 72 (2021), 160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00033-021-01591-x doi: 10.1007/s00033-021-01591-x
[20]	T. Tang, J. Sun, Local well-posedness for the density-dependent incompressible magneto-micropolar system with vacuum, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. B, 26 (2021), 6017–6026. https://doi.org/10.3934/dcdsb.2020377 doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2020377
[21]	J. Fan, Z. Zhang, Y. Zhou, Local well-posedness for the incompressible full magneto-micropolar system with vacuum, Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 71 (2020), 42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00033-020-1267-z doi: 10.1007/s00033-020-1267-z
[22]	M. A. Fahmy, A new boundary element algorithm for a general solution of nonlinear space-time fractional dual phase-lag bio-heat transfer problems during electromagnetic radiation, Case Stud. Therm. Eng., 25 (2021), 100918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2021.100918 doi: 10.1016/j.csite.2021.100918
[23]	M. A. Fahmy, A new boundary element formulation for modeling and simulation of three-temperature distributions in carbon nanotube fiber reinforced composites with inclusions, Math. Method. Appl. Sci., in press. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.7312
[24]	M. A. Fahmy, A new BEM modeling algorithm for size-dependent thermopiezoelectric problems in smart nanostructures, Comput. Mater. Con., 69 (2021), 931–944. https://doi.org/10.32604/cmc.2021.018191 doi: 10.32604/cmc.2021.018191
[25]	M. A. Fahmy, Boundary element modeling of 3T nonlinear transient magneto-thermoviscoelastic wave propagation problems in anisotropic circular cylindrical shells, Compos. Struct., 277 (2021), 114655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.114655 doi: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.114655
[26]	M. A. Fahmy, M. M. Almehmadi, F. M. Al Subhi, A. Sohail, Fractional boundary element solution of three-temperature thermoelectric problems, Sci. Rep., 12 (2022), 6760. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-10639-5 doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-10639-5
[27]	M. A. Fahmy, 3D Boundary element model for ultrasonic wave propagation fractional order boundary value problems of functionally graded anisotropic fiber-reinforced plates, Fractal Fract., 6 (2022), 247. https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract6050247 doi: 10.3390/fractalfract6050247
[28]	M. A. Fahmy, Boundary element and sensitivity analysis of anisotropic thermoelastic metal and alloy discs with holes, Materials, 15 (2022), 1828. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15051828 doi: 10.3390/ma15051828
[29]	M. A. Fahmy, M. M. Almehmadi, Boundary element analysis of rotating functionally graded anisotropic fiber-reinforced magneto-thermoelastic composites, Open Eng., 12 (2022), 313–322. https://doi.org/10.1515/eng-2022-0036 doi: 10.1515/eng-2022-0036

This article has been cited by:

Kanikar Muangchoo, Three novel two-step proximal-like methods for solving equilibrium and fixed point problems in real Hilbert spaces, 2022, 41, 2238-3603, 10.1007/s40314-022-02088-7

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2022 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

1.
沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院沈阳 110142

AIMS Mathematics

1.8 3.4

Metrics

Article views(1832) PDF downloads(89) Cited by(0)

Preview PDF

Download XML

Export Citation

Article outline

Show full outline

AIMS Mathematics

Magnetohydrodynamics approximation of the compressible full magneto- micropolar system

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Proof of main result

3. Conclusions

Use of AI tools declaration

Acknowledgments

Conflict of interest

References

This article has been cited by:

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Other Articles By Authors

Catalog

AIMS Mathematics

Magnetohydrodynamics approximation of the compressible full magneto- micropolar system

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Proof of main result

3. Conclusions

Use of AI tools declaration

Acknowledgments

Conflict of interest

References

This article has been cited by:

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Other Articles By Authors

Related pages

Tools

Export File

Citation

Format

Content

Catalog