Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge / 2018 / iii / Paper 321 / 3 / a

Let $\mathbf{\zeta }=\nabla \times \mathbf{u}$ and $\mathbf{\omega }=\mathbf{\zeta }+2\Omega {\mathbf{e}}_z$ be the relative vorticity and absolute vorticity. The nonlinear acceleration identity rewrites the momentum equation asTaking the curl removes the pressure, kinetic energy gradient and shearing-sheet tidal potential. ThusBoth $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{u}$ and $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{\omega }$ vanish. The vorticity equation is consequentlyFor the absolute-vorticity flux tensor $T_{ij}=u_i{\omega }_j-{\omega }_i{u}_j$, use the flux convention $(\nabla \cdot \mathbf{T}{)}_j={\partial }_i{T}_{ij}$, with the first index denoting transport direction. This givesThe scalar $\theta$ is a buoyancy displacement variable, so dimensional consistency gives it units of length; the printed potential-temperature terminology presupposes this normalization. Its curl source directly forces only the $y,z$ components of absolute vorticity. Hence radial vorticity conservation in a shearing sheet takes the local flux formIts volume integral is constant when the net boundary flux vanishes. However $D_t{\omega }_x=\mathbf{\omega }\cdot \nabla u_x$ still permits vortex stretching; the radial component is not generally a materially conserved scalar in three dimensions. Using divergence on the second index of the stated tensor would reverse the transport sign, so the tensor convention matters.