For a traveling sinusoidal boundary forcing with horizontal phase speed $c_p$, the pressure and horizontal velocity polarization gives the displayed relation between upward energy input and vertical wave momentum flux. A slowly established outgoing wave envelope deposits horizontal mean momentum as its front advances. In the frame moving at $c_p$, the order-amplitude-squared change of mean kinetic energy is $-{\rho }_0{c}_p\int \overline{u}dz$. Its loss rate equals the boundary work in the laboratory frame. The comparison uses a finite perturbation of the infinite uniform background energy.

For the internal rotation symmetry of two real scalar fields with $\delta {\varphi }_1=\alpha {\varphi }_2$ and $\delta {\varphi }_2=-\alpha {\varphi }_1$, the Noether charge is $Q=i\int (a_1^{†}{a}_2-a_2^{†}{a}_1)d^{3}p/(2\pi {)}^3$. Its commutators satisfy $[Q,b_{\pm }^{†}]=\pm b_{\pm }^{†}$, so these creation operators produce charge eigenstates in the one-particle state sector. Substitution gives $Q=N_{+}-N_{-}$, converting the rotation of real components into opposite charges in a complex basis.

For a linear program $\min \{c^{T}x:Ax=b,x\ge 0\}$ and its dual linear program, write $e=1$, $\bar{b}=b-Ae$, $\bar{c}=c-e$, and $\bar{z}=c^{T}e+1$. Introduce $x,s\ge 0$, $\tau ,\kappa ,\theta ,\rho \ge 0$, and a free multiplier $\lambda$ satisfyingThe point $x=s=e$, $\tau =\kappa =\theta =\rho =1$, $\lambda =0$ is strictly positive in all constrained coordinates. Multiplying the first three equations by ${\lambda }^T,x^T,\tau$ respectively and adding gives the displayed identity. Minimizing $\theta$ has value zero: primal-dual optimal solutions or certificates from Farkas' lemma give zero-$\theta$ solutions after selecting positive $\rho$ and scaling. At $\theta =0$, $\tau >0$ gives an optimal primal-dual pair by division by $\tau$, while $\kappa >0$ gives a primal infeasibility or dual infeasibility certificate. A point with $\tau =\kappa =0$ is not decisive; choosing a relative interior point of the optimal face of a linear program avoids that degeneracy because the face contains a point with $\tau +\kappa >0$.

The distance between adjacent bright interference fringes, or between adjacent dark interference fringes, measured along a specified direction. For the symmetric crossing plane waves in wave interference, measured along $x$, $\Lambda =\lambda /(2\sin \theta )$. Bright-to-dark separation is $\Lambda /2$. As $\theta$ tends to zero the spacing diverges; at $\theta =0$ the phase difference is spatially constant and there are no periodic bands.

The maturity-indexed curve of interest rates inferred from prices of zero-coupon bonds. Continuously compounded yields $y(t,T)=-\log P(t,T)/(T-t)$ average the instantaneous forward rate over $[t,T]$. Modelling a curve requires both dependence across maturities and consistent evolution through observation time; specifying unrelated one-dimensional rate distributions is insufficient.

A cap limits the floating rate on a notional principal by paying the excess over a strike for successive accrual periods. It is a sum of caplets. For accrual fraction $\delta$ and reset at $T$ with payment at $U$, the unit-notional payoff is $\delta (L(T;T,U)-K{)}^{+}$ at $U$, where $L(T;T,U)=[P(T,U{)}^{-1}-1]/\delta$ and $P$ is a zero-coupon bond price.

An interaction plot displays response means against levels of one factor, with separate lines for levels of another and optional panels for further factors. In an additive linear regression, the difference between two lines is constant across the horizontal factor, so the population-mean lines are parallel. Changing line separations or crossings show a statistical interaction on that response scale. Sample means may be nonparallel through noise, so the plot describes the effect pattern rather than replacing a formal hypothesis test.

Particles on a countable lattice attempt jumps at the rates $p(x,y)$, and an attempt into an occupied site is suppressed. Thus each site contains at most one particle and the number of particles is conserved when finite. Here ${\eta }^{xy}$ interchanges the occupations at $x$ and $y$. Bounded nearest-neighbour rates give a well-defined Markov process. A symmetric jump kernel gives the symmetric simple exclusion process; an unequal left-right kernel gives the asymmetric simple exclusion process.

At each site, a rate-one clock rings and the site copies the state of a randomly chosen neighbor. The model is a Markov process on Ising spin configurations, interpreted through its local update infinitesimal generator. All constant configurations are absorbing state. Tracing copying arrows backwards gives the voter-model duality with coalescing random walks.

Treatment contamination occurs when participants in one arm of a randomized controlled trial receive an intervention assigned to another arm. This is distinct from contamination in robust estimation. The intention-to-treat analysis still compares randomized assignments, but intervention receipt becomes less separated between the arms, often diluting the assignment effect. Receipt-based comparisons can introduce confounding because receipt need not be randomized.

The same intensity measure can belong to very different point processes. A Poisson point process with a locally finite intensity measure $\mu$ adds two requirements: each finite-intensity window count has the Poisson distribution of mean $\mu (W)$, and counts in pairwise disjoint observation windows are mutually independent. These requirements determine its probability law; they do not follow from the formula for $\mu$.^[ref]

A randomly shifted lattice point process, a unit-rate Poisson point process, and the shared random rate gives dependent point counts construction all satisfy $\mu (A)=|A|$ on the real line. Nevertheless, their counts in $[0,1)$ have respectively variance zero, one, and two. Counts in the disjoint observation windows $[0,1/2)$ and $[1/2,1)$ have respectively covariance $-1/4$, zero, and $1/4$. These exact calculations show why measuring mean density cannot identify a spacing or statistical dependence model.

Here is an explicit example even within simple point processes. Let $K$ be a positive integer with probability mass function $\mathbb{P}(K=k)=1/[k(k+1)]$. The telescoping series sums to one, $K$ is finite almost surely, but $\mathbb{E}[K]={\sum }_{k\ge 1}1/(k+1)=\infty$. Conditional on $K$, sample $K$ independent points with the uniform distribution on $(0,1)$. The resulting point process has finitely many distinct points almost surely, while $\mu ((0,1))=\infty$. Thus finite counts in each realization and finite mean counts are separate requirements; local finiteness of the intensity measure is an integrability assumption.

Mixing turbulent populations with differing viscous dissipation gives $S_p={\beta }_p{r}^{p/3}⟨{ϵ}_a^{p/3}⟩$. Relative to the same power of the mean viscous dissipation, the coefficient changes with the intensity distribution except at $p=3$. Thus universality of all unconditional coefficients is incompatible with arbitrary integral-scale intermittency.

The integral Gram determinant has absolute value one, equivalently the lattice equals its bilinear-form dual. The K3 intersection lattice is an indefinite example.

Every vector in an even lattice has even integral norm. The E8 lattice and the hyperbolic plane appearing in the K3 intersection lattice are examples.

Going up and going down concern lifting inclusions of prime ideals through a ring extension. Going-up theorem lifts upward from a chosen lower prime for an integral extension. Going-down theorem lifts downward from a chosen upper prime under additional hypotheses, including an integrally closed base domain for integral extensions of domains.

A group has integral cohomological dimension at most one precisely when it is a free group, including the trivial free group in dimension zero. This result concerns integral coefficients; a rational dimension-one statement has different conclusions.

A multiple integral accumulates a function over a region with several coordinates. The Fubini theorem and Tonelli theorem give conditions under which it equals successive one-dimensional integrals. A change of variables formula expresses it in new coordinates using the absolute Jacobian determinant.

In ${\int }_a^{b}f(x)dx$, the function $f$ is the integrand. It is distinct from the integration variable, the bounds and the resulting integral. In contour integration, the transformed integrand includes the parametrization derivative.

Here $r=|\mathbf{r}|$, ${\mathbf{P}}_c=\mathbf{r}-c{\mathbf{r}}_0$ and $P_c=|{\mathbf{P}}_c|$. The identity holds where the segment of source points $t{\mathbf{r}}_0$, $0\le t\le c$, avoids the observation point and the denominator is nonzero. Differentiating the right side with respect to $c$ gives the integrand and its value at $c=0$ is zero. Dotting with a current dipole moment evaluates a continuous line of dipole electric potentials.