Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge / 2001 / iii / Paper 36 / 3

Choose a magnetic vector potential $\mathbf{A}$ with $\nabla \times \mathbf{A}=\mathbf{B}$, and define the total magnetic helicity byThe value is unchanged by a single-valued gauge transformation $\mathbf{A}\mapsto \mathbf{A}+\nabla \chi$, becauseHere both the solenoidal magnetic-field constraint and the tangent boundary field are essential. In a multiply connected domain, choose the vector potential by extending the tangent field by zero to all space and fixing its decay there, or fix the equivalent circulation convention. This avoids silently varying the non-gradient harmonic ambiguity of a vector potential on the restricted domain.

The ideal magnetohydrodynamic induction equation permitsDifferentiating $H_M$ and using integration by parts for curl,The volume product vanishes algebraically, the gauge flux vanishes since $\mathbf{B}\cdot \mathbf{n}=0$, and the last boundary term vanishes since $\mathbf{v}=0$. Thus magnetic helicity is conserved even though viscosity dissipates mechanical energy.

Through magnetic flux freezing, magnetic field lines move with the fluid and retain their linkage during every smooth ideal motion. For two thin closed flux tubes carrying fluxes ${\Phi }_1,{\Phi }_2$, their mutual contribution is $2L{\Phi }_1{\Phi }_2$, where $L$ is their linking number; self-contributions measure twisting and writhing of the tubes. This explains the topological content of magnetic helicity. Conservation of this one scalar is a consequence of the frozen structure, not a complete description of all that structure.

Let $K$ be the kinetic energy, $M$ the magnetic energy and $E=K+M$:Dot the magnetohydrodynamic momentum equation with $\mathbf{v}$ and integrate. Incompressibility and the zero boundary velocity remove the advective and pressure work. The viscous term integrates to $-\rho \nu {\int }_D|\nabla \mathbf{v}{|}^2$. ThusThe ideal magnetohydrodynamic induction equation gives, with no boundary contribution,The Lorentz force density therefore transfers energy between the field and the fluid without creating total energy. Since $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{v}=0$ and $\mathbf{v}=0$ on the boundary, another integration by parts gives $\int |\nabla \mathbf{v}{|}^2=\int |{\mathbf{\omega }}_v{|}^2$, where ${\mathbf{\omega }}_v=\nabla \times \mathbf{v}$ is vorticity. The viscous magnetic-relaxation energy identity isThe conserved nonzero magnetic helicity prevents all the field energy from disappearing. Fix a bounded inverse-curl convention for the magnetic vector potential, so that $\Vert \mathbf{A}{\Vert }_2\le C_D\Vert \mathbf{B}{\Vert }_2$. The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality gives the magnetic-energy lower bound from helicity,Consequently $E$ decreases to a finite positive limit andUnder the intended regular long-time interpretation of smooth vorticity, the dissipation cannot keep producing peaks of fixed height and arbitrarily short duration. More precisely, if $d(t)=\Vert {\mathbf{\omega }}_v(t){\Vert }_2^2$ is uniformly continuous, uniformly continuous integrable dissipation tends to zero proves $d(t)\to 0$. The Poincaré inequality and the identity above then imply $\Vert \mathbf{v}(t){\Vert }_2\to 0$.

To identify the asymptotic state, suppose the regular relaxation has a limit, or work on a compact invariant limiting set on which the energy is continuous. On such a set the energy is constant, so the displayed identity forces ${\mathbf{\omega }}_v=0$, and the zero boundary velocity forces $\mathbf{v}=0$. The induction equation is then stationary, and the momentum equation becomesThis is magnetostatic equilibrium, with nonzero field allowed and required here by conserved magnetic helicity. It is not necessarily a force-free magnetic field: a pressure gradient can balance the magnetic force. If the field develops a current sheet, equilibrium is understood with the corresponding interface force balance.

There is a mathematical qualification to the smoothness premise. Smoothness at each finite time alone does not prove uniform long-time bounds, uniform continuity of dissipation or convergence to one limiting field. The energy calculation proves finite total dissipation unconditionally for a smooth solution; the settling conclusion is the regular-relaxation argument just given. A rigorous global convergence theorem requires that additional long-time control. In particular, smooth vorticity does not require smooth electric current density in the limiting state.

The relevant competition is between energy reduction and magnetic flux freezing. Ideal evolution transports the entire connectivity of the magnetic field lines, including the separation and linkage of flux regions. Viscous dissipation can remove kinetic energy but cannot permit magnetic reconnection between such regions. As each region relaxes toward lower magnetic energy, neighboring flux regions can approach with different limiting tangential fields. A smooth transition can become increasingly thin; its field remains bounded while its curl, and therefore its electric current density, becomes large.

The limiting object is a current sheet. If $\mathbf{n}$ points from its minus to its plus side, its surface electric current density isFor a tangential discontinuity, ${\mathbf{B}}_{\pm }\cdot \mathbf{n}=0$. The normal balance in magnetostatic equilibrium requiresThus a finite jump of tangential field can coexist with equilibrium: the jump of magnetic pressure is balanced by the ordinary pressure jump.

This need not happen for every initial field; a field already in smooth magnetostatic equilibrium is an immediate exception. The expectation concerns topology-constrained relaxation for which a smooth limiting arrangement is obstructed. Current-sheet formation is consistent with the relaxation framework developed in Moffatt's primary analysis. Retaining complete frozen connectivity is essential; minimizing energy subject only to the value of total magnetic helicity would generally permit field rearrangements forbidden by this evolution.

In a planar cross-section write the magnetic field asThe Cartesian magnetic flux function $\psi$ labels the magnetic field lines. Ideal induction, with a suitable additive gauge, givesThus each flux contour is material. Incompressibility also preserves the area inside any material contour. Neither a magnetic island's flux distribution nor the connections of a separatrix can be freely altered during relaxation.

A configuration with two or more magnetic islands separated by an X-type saddle illustrates the mechanism. As the magnetic islands reshape to lower magnetic energy, the arms of the separatrix can be pressed together. Magnetic reconnection would change the topology, so it is excluded in a perfect conductor. The X-type structure can instead flatten into an extended interface, with oppositely directed tangential fields on its two sides. The transition shrinks and the electric current density concentrates into a current sheet. Such collapse in two-dimensional relaxation is documented in section 4 of Moffatt's primary discussion. It is a possible asymptotic outcome, not a finite-time singularity assertion or a property of every planar field.

The local equations show precisely how the interface can support equilibrium. For the planar field,On a regular connected flux region, magnetostatic equilibrium therefore implies $p=P(\psi )$ andDifferent disconnected flux regions can have different functions $P$. Their limiting fields need not join with continuous first derivatives of $\psi$ across a common separatrix; continuity of total pressure allows the tangential-field jump.

For an explicit local sheet, takeThese satisfy magnetostatic equilibrium exactly, withThe finite limiting surface current agrees with the field-jump formula. This is a local equilibrium demonstration of the sheet balance, not a claim that this particular family is the full ideal relaxation trajectory from the given initial data.

Strictly planar fields of the form above have zero magnetic helicity: choose $\mathbf{A}=\psi {\mathbf{e}}_z$, giving $\mathbf{A}\cdot \mathbf{B}=0$. Thus this strictly planar example interprets the last part as a separate illustration of topology-constrained relaxation. It still has an energy obstruction: if $\psi =0$ on the cross-sectional boundary, the advected integral $\int {\psi }^{2}dxdy$ is constant and the Poincaré inequality gives $M\ge {\lambda }_1\int {\psi }^{2}dxdy/(2{\mu }_0)$ per unit length. If the earlier nonzero-helicity condition is retained instead, a possible extension is a field depending on only two coordinates but permitting an axial component, with periodic boundary conditions in the invariant direction. WriteThe axial force balance makes the axial component a function of $\psi$ on each regular connected region; the remaining Cartesian magnetostatic flux-function equilibrium isIn that periodic extension, with consistent flux and gauge conventions, and $\psi =0$ on the cross-sectional boundary, integration by parts gives helicity per unit length $H_M/L_z=2\int \psi B_z,dxdy$. It can be nonzero. The same separatrix-collapse mechanism still concentrates current in a sheet. Three-dimensional linkage is therefore unnecessary for sheet formation; planar frozen flux-contour topology already supplies the constraint.