to\infty$ are being nested within the limit $\kappa\to0$. Hence, the subsequent constraints on diffusion anomaly deduced from these bounds appropriately take into account the divergence of $\langle|\nabla\theta|^2\rangle$ in infinite time. In essence, this approach is consistent with the double limit $\lim_{\kappa\to0}\lim_{t\to\infty}$ taken in a selective way, in the sense that a dynamical property (here being the peak mean-square gradients) is registered during the first limit $t\to\infty$ and then monitored during the second limit $\kappa\to0$. Evidently, without such a selection, this double limit would yield a trivial result because no smooth scalar distribution would survive the limit $t\to\infty$ before $\kappa$ tends to zero. In passing, it is worth mentioning that the asymptotic regime of small but positive $\kappa$ and large but finite time, presumably $t\gg T$, is relevant in the study of exponential decay behavior mentioned in the opening paragraph of this section.

Production and dissipation of scalar gradients
----------------------------------------------

The evolution of $\nabla\theta$ is governed by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{gradients}
\partial_t\nabla\theta + (\u\cdot\nabla)\nabla\theta &=& 
\bomega\times\nabla\theta - (\nabla\theta\cdot\nabla)\u
+ \kappa\Delta\nabla\theta,
~~~~\nabla\cdot\u=0,\end{aligned}$$ where $\bomega=\nabla\times\u$ is the vorticity. Apart from the “Coriolis” term $\bomega\times\nabla\theta$, whose sole effect is to rotate $\nabla\theta$ without changing its magnitude, Eq. (\[gradients\]) resembles the three-dimensional vorticity equation in several aspects. For example, the gradient $\nabla\theta$ is advected by the velocity field $\u$ just as the vorticity $\bomega$. As another example, the term $(\nabla\theta\cdot\nabla)\u$, which is responsible for the production of scalar gradients, is an analogue of the vortex stretching term. Despite these apparent similarities, there are fundamental differences between “genuine” turbulence and passive scalar advection. First, the passive vector $\nabla\theta$ is irrotational whereas $\bomega$ is solenoidal. Second, $\theta$ is materially conserved while there exists
to\infty$ are being nested within the limit $ \kappa\to0$. Hence, the subsequent constraints on dissemination anomaly deduce from these bounds appropriately take into account the discrepancy of $ \langle|\nabla\theta|^2\rangle$ in infinite time. In kernel, this approach is consistent with the bivalent terminus ad quem $ \lim_{\kappa\to0}\lim_{t\to\infty}$ taken in a selective way, in the common sense that a dynamical property (here being the peak bastardly - straight gradients) is registered during the first limit $ t\to\infty$ and then monitored during the second terminus ad quem $ \kappa\to0$. Evidently, without such a selection, this double terminus ad quem would yield a trivial result because no smooth scalar distribution would survive the terminus ad quem $ t\to\infty$ before $ \kappa$ tends to zero. In elapse, it is worth mentioning that the asymptotic regime of belittled but positive $ \kappa$ and large but finite time, presumably $ t\gg T$, is relevant in the study of exponential decay behavior mentioned in the opening paragraph of this section. 

 Production and dissipation of scalar gradients 
 ---------------------------------------------- 

 The evolution of $ \nabla\theta$ is governed by $ $ \begin{aligned } 
 \label{gradients } 
 \partial_t\nabla\theta + (\u\cdot\nabla)\nabla\theta & = & 
 \bomega\times\nabla\theta - (\nabla\theta\cdot\nabla)\u 
 + \kappa\Delta\nabla\theta, 
 ~~~~\nabla\cdot\u=0,\end{aligned}$$ where $ \bomega=\nabla\times\u$ is the vorticity. Apart from the “ Coriolis ” term $ \bomega\times\nabla\theta$, whose sole effect is to revolve $ \nabla\theta$ without changing its magnitude, Eq. (\[gradients\ ]) resemble the three - dimensional vorticity equality in several aspects. For example, the gradient $ \nabla\theta$ is advected by the speed field $ \u$ barely as the vorticity $ \bomega$. As another example, the term $ (\nabla\theta\cdot\nabla)\u$, which is creditworthy for the production of scalar gradients, is an analogue of the vortex stretching term. Despite these apparent similarities, there are fundamental differences between “ genuine ” turbulence and passive scalar advection. First, the passive vector $ \nabla\theta$ is irrotational whereas $ \bomega$ is solenoidal. Second, $ \theta$ is materially conserved while there exist
to\ijfty$ are being nested wiuhin the limit $\kakpq\to0$. Heice, the subsequdnt constraints on diffusion abomalt deduced from these buunds appgopriatelt tajw into account the diverfcnce mh $\langle|\nabla\thgta|^2\rangle$ in infinite time. Iv zssence, this approach is consistent rith thr fouble limit $\lym_{\kakpa\eo0}\lij_{n\ti\infty}$ taken in a selective wzy, in tie sense that a dynamical property (here bfing the peak mean-squage gradientw) is eegistered djring the first limit $j\to\infty$ and then monitored durivg thz second linir $\kwkpa\to0$. Evidenvly, winhout such a selectiot, this couble limit wpulv yiwld a trivial result uecause no smooth scwlar distsiyution would survive rhw limht $t\do\inwry$ cefkrx $\kzppa$ tfnda to zero. Jn passing, ut is worth mentionond that the asyjptotis wegime of small but positive $\kappa$ and narfe but finite time, presymably $t\gg T$, is relevwnt in thq study of exponential decay behavior mentioned it the upeulkg pxeahraph of this section.

Production and dissipatijh pf scalar gradiekts
----------------------------------------------

The evolution og $\janja\theta$ is goxerned by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{hradienjs}
\partual_t\nabla\uheta + (\u\cdot\nabla)\nabla\theta &=& 
\bomwga\times\nablc\thwta - (\nabla\theta\cdoc\nabla)\u
+ \kappc\Delta\mabla\yheta,
~~~~\nabla\cdot\u=0,\end{alignzd}$$ whede $\bomega=\nahla\times\u$ ks the vorticity. Apsrd from the “Coriolis” term $\bjmega\timew\nabka\theta$, whoxe solq effect id to vmtate $\nabla\theta$ wlthouj chancing its mwgnitude, Eq. (\[gradients\]) resembles the three-dimemshondl vortieity eauation in sederal aspects. Yor exam'le, thd gradient $\nabla\tieta$ is advested by the vapocity field $\u$ just ws tye virticith $\bomega$. As anoyher examilt, the term $(\nabla\theta\cdot\nabka)\u$, shich is responwiboe for the prodictkon ov xcwnar gradientv, is an snaloeue of uke yorgex xtretching term. Desphte fhese apparent simolwrities, jhere are fundamental cifferences betweej “gennine” tnrbulemce and passive scalar advection. Rirst, the pafsive vector $\naboa\theta$ is ixrotational whereas $\bomega$ is solenoidal. Second, $\theta$ is mqterially conserved ehile there exises
to\infty$ are being nested within the limit the constraints on anomaly deduced from account divergence of $\langle|\nabla\theta|^2\rangle$ infinite time. In this approach is consistent with the limit $\lim_{\kappa\to0}\lim_{t\to\infty}$ taken in a selective way, in the sense that a dynamical (here being the peak mean-square gradients) is registered during the first limit $t\to\infty$ then during second $\kappa\to0$. Evidently, without such a selection, this double limit would yield a trivial result because no scalar distribution would survive the limit $t\to\infty$ before tends to zero. In it is worth mentioning that asymptotic of small positive and but finite time, $t\gg T$, is relevant in the study of exponential decay behavior mentioned in the opening paragraph of section. Production of scalar ---------------------------------------------- evolution $\nabla\theta$ is governed \label{gradients} \partial_t\nabla\theta + (\u\cdot\nabla)\nabla\theta &=& \bomega\times\nabla\theta \kappa\Delta\nabla\theta, ~~~~\nabla\cdot\u=0,\end{aligned}$$ where $\bomega=\nabla\times\u$ is the vorticity. Apart the “Coriolis” $\bomega\times\nabla\theta$, whose sole effect is to $\nabla\theta$ without changing its magnitude, Eq. (\[gradients\]) resembles three-dimensional vorticity equation in several aspects. For example, the gradient $\nabla\theta$ is advected by the $\u$ just as the $\bomega$. As another the $(\nabla\theta\cdot\nabla)\u$, is for the of scalar gradients, is an analogue of the vortex stretching term. these apparent similarities, there are fundamental differences between “genuine” turbulence scalar First, the passive $\nabla\theta$ is irrotational whereas is Second, $\theta$ is materially there
to\infty$ are being nested withIn the limit $\Kappa\To0$. HEncE, tHe suBseqUent constraintS On diFfusion anomaly deduced fRom thEsE BounDS aPpropRiately TAkE INto AcCoUnt ThE DiVergeNce Of $\langlE|\nabla\thetA|^2\raNgLe$ in infinite TImE. In essence, ThiS approach is cOnsIstent WiTh tHE doubLe lImit $\lIm_{\kappA\To0}\lim_{t\To\infty}$ taKeN In a selECtive waY, IN tHe seNse that a dynamical PRoPErty (here being tHe peak MeAN-sQUAre GraDients) is reGiStereD During tHE fIRST liMIt $t\to\infty$ and Then monitorED duRing thE sEcoND limit $\Kappa\To0$. eVidEntly, withouT sucH a selectiOn, this DOuble liMIt would Yield a TriViaL resULt BeCauSe NO smOOtH scALar DistribuTiOn Would SurvIVE THe liMit $T\to\iNfty$ bEfore $\kappa$ tenDs tO zerO. in pAssinG, it is WortH mEntioNing thAt the AsYmptotic regime oF smaLl but posiTivE $\kAppA$ aNd larGE but fiNitE tiMe, presuMably $t\gG t$, is ReLEVAnT in the study of exponEnTIAl Decay behAvior mENtIoNEd in the oPeNinG parAGRaph oF thiS SeCtion.

ProDuctioN AnD dIssipatIoN of scaLaR grAdiEnts
----------------------------------------------

THE evoLution Of $\nabla\tHeta$ iS Governed by $$\begiN{Aligned}
\label{gRAdIENtS}
\PartIal_T\nabla\theta + (\U\cdoT\NablA)\nabLA\tHetA &=& 
\BomegA\timeS\nABlA\Theta - (\nabla\theta\cdot\NaBla)\u
+ \kaPpa\DeLta\nabla\theta,
~~~~\Nabla\cdot\u=0,\END{Aligned}$$ wHere $\BOmEGa=\nabla\times\u$ iS the vOrticity. ApARt from thE “CoriOlis” term $\Bomega\timES\Nabla\theTa$, wHosE soLe eFFEcT is to rotate $\naBLA\theTa$ Without ChaNging itS maGniTudE, Eq. (\[GrAdients\]) reSembles tHe ThReE-dImeNsionAL vorticiTy EquAtIon In sevERal aspEcts. FOr exAmPlE, The GradienT $\NaBLA\theTa$ Is AdveCteD bY the vElocITy fIeld $\u$ juSt as the voRtiCIty $\bOmEgA$. As anotHer example, the TeRm $(\nabla\theTa\CdoT\nabla)\U$, WHich is reSponsible for the productiON of scalAr gRadieNts, iS an analogUe oF the voRteX StretcHing teRm. DesPiTe tHESe appAREnT siMiLarities, thERE arE fundAmEntaL differEnces between “genuinE” TurBulence and pasSivE scaLAR aDveCTiON. FiRsT, The PASsive vector $\nablA\theta$ is irRoTAtIonal whereAS $\boMeGa$ is solEnoidal. seconD, $\Theta$ is MateriallY conserveD wHile THEre Exists
to\infty$ are being nested  within th e lim it$\k ap pa\t o0$.  Hence, the su b sequ ent constraints on dif fusio na noma l ydeduc ed from th e s e b ou nd s a pp r op riate lytake in to account  th edivergence o f  $ \langle|\n abl a\theta|^2\r ang le$ in  i nfi n ite t ime . Inessenc e , this  approach  i s  consi s tent wi t h  t he d ouble limit $\lim _ {\ k appa\to0}\lim_ {t\to\ in f ty } $  ta ken  in a sele ct ive w a y, in t h es e n set hat a dynamic al property (he re bei ng  th e  peakmean- sq u are  gradients)  isregistere d duri n g the f i rst lim it $t\ to\ inf ty$a nd  t hen  m o nit o re d d u rin g the se co nd  limi t $\ k a p p a\to 0$.  Evi dentl y, without su cha se l ect ion,thisdoub le  limi t woul d yie ld  a trivial resu lt b ecause no  sm oo thsc alard istrib uti onwould s urvivet heli m i t  $ t\to\infty$ before  $ \ k ap pa$ tend s to z e ro .I n passin g,  it  isw o rth m enti o ni ng thatthe as y mp to tic reg im e of s ma llbut  posi t ive$\kapp a$ and l argeb ut finite time ,  presumably $ t \g g T$ ,  isrel evant in th e st u dy o f ex p on ent i al de cay b eh a vi o r mentioned in theop eningparag raph of thissection.
P r o ductionandd is s ipation of sca lar g radients
- - -------- ----- -------- --------- - - -------- --- -
The  ev o l ut ion of $\nabl a \ thet a$  is gov ern ed by $ $\b egi n{a lig ne d}
\label {gradien ts }\p ar tia l_t\n a bla\thet a+ ( \u \cd ot\na b la)\na bla\t heta  & =& 
\b omega\t i me s \ nabl a\ th eta- ( \n abla\ thet a \cd ot\nabl a)\u
+ \k app a \Del ta \n abla\th eta,
~~~~\nab la \cdot\u=0, \e nd{ aligne d } $$ where  $\bomega=\nabla\times\ u $ is th e v ortic ity.  Apart fr omthe “C ori o lis” t erm $\ bomeg a\ tim e s \nabl a \ th eta $,  whose sol e eff ect i sto r otate $ \nabla\theta$ with o utchanging itsmag nitu d e ,Eq. (\ [ gra di e nts \ ] ) resembles the  three-dim en s io nal vortic i tyeq uationin seve ral a s pects.For examp le, the g ra dien t $\n abla\theta $ is adv ected byt he ve l oc ity f iel d $\u$  j ust  as t he vor t ici ty $\ bomega $.  As an other  e xample,the term $(\nabla\theta \cdot\ nabla )\u $, whichisr esp onsible f or t he product ion  of  scal arg radie nts, is  an analo gueo f the vor t ex  st r e tc hing term.D e s pit e the sea pparen t si milarities, there are fundamenta l di f f ere nce s  bet we en “genuine” t urb ul e n ce and p as sive scalar  advecti on .  Firs t, the  passi ve vect o r  $ \ nabla\ thet a$is irrota tio na l  wherea s$\ b omega$  isso lenoid al. Se c ond, $ \theta$ is mater ially c onser v edwhile  t here ex i sts
to\infty$ are_being nested_within the limit $\kappa\to0$._Hence, the_subsequent_constraints on_diffusion_anomaly deduced from_these bounds appropriately_take into account the_divergence of $\langle|\nabla\theta|^2\rangle$_in_infinite time. In essence, this approach is consistent with the double limit $\lim_{\kappa\to0}\lim_{t\to\infty}$ taken_in_a selective_way,_in_the sense that a dynamical_property (here being the peak_mean-square gradients)_is registered during the first limit $t\to\infty$ and_then_monitored during the_second limit $\kappa\to0$. Evidently, without such a selection, this_double limit would yield a trivial_result because no_smooth_scalar_distribution would survive the_limit $t\to\infty$ before $\kappa$ tends to_zero. In passing, it is worth_mentioning that the asymptotic regime of small_but positive $\kappa$ and large but_finite time, presumably $t\gg T$,_is relevant_in the study of exponential_decay behavior mentioned_in the_opening paragraph of_this section.

Production and dissipation of scalar_gradients
----------------------------------------------

The evolution of_$\nabla\theta$ is governed by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{gradients}
\partial_t\nabla\theta +_(\u\cdot\nabla)\nabla\theta_&=& 
\bomega\times\nabla\theta -_(\nabla\theta\cdot\nabla)\u
+_\kappa\Delta\nabla\theta,
~~~~\nabla\cdot\u=0,\end{aligned}$$_where $\bomega=\nabla\times\u$_is the vorticity._Apart_from the_“Coriolis”_term $\bomega\times\nabla\theta$, whose sole effect is_to_rotate $\nabla\theta$ without changing its magnitude, Eq._(\[gradients\]) resembles the three-dimensional_vorticity_equation in several aspects._For example, the gradient $\nabla\theta$_is advected by the velocity field_$\u$ just_as the_vorticity $\bomega$. As another example, the term $(\nabla\theta\cdot\nabla)\u$, which is responsible_for the production of scalar gradients,_is an analogue of_the vortex_stretching_term. Despite these_apparent_similarities, there_are fundamental differences between “genuine” turbulence and_passive scalar_advection. First, the passive vector $\nabla\theta$_is irrotational whereas $\bomega$_is_solenoidal. Second, $\theta$ is materially conserved_while there exists