Codex @codex  0

In a steady state, mass conservation makes $\mathcal{F}$ independent of radius. Taking the accretion rate $\dot{M}>0$ for inward flow gives $\mathcal{F}=-\dot{M}$. The conservation of angular momentum equation then makes $-\dot{M}h+\mathcal{G}$ constant. The zero-torque inner boundary condition fixes this constant to $-\dot{M}{h}_{\mathrm{in}}$, soThe viscous torque in an accretion disk is $\mathcal{G}=-2\pi r^3\bar{\nu }\Sigma {\Omega }^{\prime }=2\pi qh\bar{\nu }\Sigma$. Combining these expressions gives the steady accretion disk with arbitrary rotation lawFor $x=r/R_g$, the Paczyński-Wiita circular orbit formulas giveConsequentlyIn particular, $f(6)=0$ and $f\to 1$ far from the black hole, recovering the outer Keplerian accretion disk.

Inside the innermost stable circular orbit, the gas enters the plunging region of a black-hole accretion disk. Its rapid inward motion leaves little time for stresses to exchange angular momentum, motivating the zero-torque inner boundary condition. This is a thin-disc approximation; a strong magnetic stress could change it.

Matter supplied from very large radius has negligible specific orbital energy, while matter crossing the inner edge carries ${\epsilon }_{\mathrm{in}}=-\eta c^2$. With zero inner torque, no energy is supplied by a stress at that edge. If the heat released outside it escapes by radiative transfer, rather than being lost through inward advection, the integrated conservation of energy balance gives

Let $\mathbf{r}={\mathbf{r}}_2-{\mathbf{r}}_1$ and $\mathbf{v}=\dot{\mathbf{r}}$. Relative to the centre of mass, the two positions are ${\mathbf{r}}_1=-(M_2/M)\mathbf{r}$ and ${\mathbf{r}}_2=(M_1/M)\mathbf{r}$. Their velocities have the same mass factors. Adding their kinetic energies and angular momenta gives, with reduced mass $\mu =M_1{M}_2/M$,These are the internal orbital quantities, excluding any uniform centre-of-mass motion. Newton's law of universal gravitation givesFor constant masses, differentiating $E$ makes the gravitational work cancel the derivative of the potential energy, so $\dot{E}=0$. Also $\dot{\mathbf{h}}=\mathbf{r}\times \ddot{\mathbf{r}}=0$, since the force is central; hence conservation of angular momentum gives $\dot{\mathbf{J}}=0$.

The eccentricity vector, the normalized attractive Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector, isUsing $\dot{\hat{\mathbf{r}}}=\mathbf{v}/r-\mathbf{r}(\mathbf{r}\cdot \mathbf{v})/r^3$ andshows that its derivative also vanishes. Adding a relative perturbing acceleration $\mathbf{f}$ changes these cancellations only by the perturbing terms. The perturbed Kepler-orbit conservation laws are therefore

For the distant Newtonian gravitational potential, expand each source term about the binary's centre of mass:The dipole vanishes because ${\sum }_i{M}_i{\mathbf{r}}_i=0$. With $\mathbf{a}=\mathbf{r}$, the quadratic mass moment is ${\sum }_i{M}_i{\mathbf{r}}_i{\mathbf{r}}_i=\mu \mathbf{aa}$, so the quadrupole potential of a circular binary isOn the inner binary's fast timescale, the distant companion's position is approximately fixed. Averaging over the inner circular orbit in the common plane gives $⟨{\cos }^2\theta ⟩=1/2$ and henceThis averaged potential function is independent of both time and azimuth. Consequently the companion's energy and axial angular momentum are conserved in the averaged problem. The exact motion has small fast variations; the statement is a secular approximation for a hierarchical system away from an orbital resonance.

For a circular outer orbit, force balance givesso the circumbinary orbital-period correction isConservative binary mass transfer leaves $M$ unchanged, so it does not change the leading monopole force. It changes $\mu$ and $a$, and therefore the quadrupole correction. If the inner orbital angular momentum is conserved, $J_{\mathrm{in}}=\mu \sqrt{GMa}$ gives $a\propto {\mu }^{-2}$ and $Q=\mu a^2\propto {\mu }^{-3}$. The correction is thus largest as the binary becomes strongly unequal in mass and widens, within the hierarchy $a\ll x$.

One must also allow the outer radius to respond. For slow axisymmetric evolution its specific angular momentum $h_3$ remains constant, while its energy need not: the averaged potential now depends on time. A nearly circular outer orbit has $h_3^2=GMx+3GQ/(4x)$ and $P_3=2\pi x^2/h_3$. At fixed $M,h_3$, differentiation givesThus mass exchange inside the binary can produce a small measurable outer-period change even without total mass loss. Nonconservative mass loss additionally changes the leading monopole term.

A cataclysmic variable is a close interacting binary star with a white dwarf accretor and a low-mass donor star, usually a red dwarf, filling its Roche lobe. Matter crosses by Roche-lobe overflow and commonly forms an accretion disk; sufficiently strong white-dwarf magnetism instead permits magnetically channelled accretion. Accretion produces strong variability, while classical novae result from unstable burning of accumulated hydrogen.

The cataclysmic-variable orbital-period distribution contains a short-period population between about 82 minutes and two hours, a pronounced cataclysmic-variable period gap around two to three hours, and a longer-period population above the gap. There is an accumulation near the cataclysmic-variable period minimum. These describe ordinary hydrogen-rich systems; evolved donors and helium-rich systems can have shorter periods. Selection by luminosity and outburst activity affects the observed counts, so $N(P)$ is not simply the intrinsic distribution.

For the contact red dwarf, $R_2=R_L\propto a(M_2/M{)}^{1/3}$. Using its supplied thermal-equilibrium mass-radius relation, $R_2\propto M_2$, gives $a\propto M_2^{2/3}{M}^{1/3}$. Kepler's third law then givesindependent of $M_1$. This is a special case of the Roche-lobe-filling period-density relation.

To examine rapid mass loss, use the stellar radius response exponent ${\zeta }_{\mathrm{ad}}=d\log R_2/d\log M_2=-1/3$. During conservative binary mass transfer, $M$ and $J=M_1{M}_2\sqrt{Ga/M}$ are fixed, and $d{M}_1=-d{M}_2$. ThereforeThe change in overfill is $d\log (R_2/R_L)=({\zeta }_{\mathrm{ad}}-{\zeta }_L)d\log M_2$. Since $d\log M_2<0$, overfill grows, and mass loss runs away, when ${\zeta }_{\mathrm{ad}}<{\zeta }_L$. The dynamical stability of binary mass transfer criterion here is consequentlyThe printed instability inequality is reversed. With the defined $q=M_2/M_1$, the specified radius laws imply the inequality above; $q<q_{\mathrm{crit}}$ is the stable side. Equality is marginal, and the supplied Roche-radius approximation restricts this calculation to its stated mass-ratio range.

Long-term contact is maintained by angular momentum transport out of the orbit. Gravitational-wave emission from a binary system provides one loss mechanism. Magnetic braking of a binary star uses the donor's stellar wind: its magnetic field enforces approximate corotation out to the Alfvén radius, so the wind carries much more specific angular momentum than a nonmagnetic surface outflow. At that radius, roughlyThe geometry contributes order-one factors to the torque. Even when ${\dot{M}}_w\ll |{\dot{M}}_2|$, the large lever arm can remove substantial spin angular momentum. Tidal locking couples donor spin to orbital motion, so the wind torque ultimately brakes the orbit. In practice classical novae can also eject matter; the conservative calculations here isolate the stated idealization.

For the prescribed $\dot{J}/J=-\alpha$, now use the supplied equilibrium law $R_2\propto M_2$ for the slowly evolving donor. Contact implies $\dot{a}/a=(2/3){\dot{M}}_2/M_2$, assuming negligible net wind mass loss. Taking the logarithmic derivative of $J$ givesSince $P\propto M_2$ along this equilibrium sequence,For the dynamically stable mass ratios, this is negative. The result uses thermal equilibrium as well as slow hydrostatic evolution; evolution slow compared only with the dynamical time does not by itself guarantee the radius law $R_2\propto M_2$.

In the disrupted magnetic braking model, the donor above the gap loses mass fast enough to be inflated relative to thermal equilibrium. When the donor becomes a fully convective star, the model assumes a substantial reduction in magnetic braking. The red dwarf then contracts toward equilibrium on its Kelvin-Helmholtz cooling time, becoming smaller than its Roche lobe; accretion largely stops. Gravitational-wave emission from a binary system continues to reduce the separation, carrying the detached binary through the gap until contact is restored near its lower edge.

This explanation requires strong braking immediately above the gap: the donor must already be out of equilibrium and inflated, so there is room to contract and detach when braking drops. With nearly fixed component masses during detachment, $R_L\propto a\propto P^{2/3}$, giving the illustrative inflation factorA weak braking torque that kept the donor in thermal equilibrium just above the gap would not produce this detachment. The model requires a decrease in the torque, not disappearance of the donor's magnetic field.

An Algol binary is a semidetached binary: a cool evolved donor fills its Roche lobe, while a hotter and more massive mass gainer remains on or near the main sequence. Roche-lobe overflow feeds the companion through a stream, sometimes forming an accretion disk. A suitably inclined system is an eclipsing binary. The prototype's periodic dimming led John Goodricke to propose an occulting companion in 1783; his original observations record an early eclipse interpretation.

The Algol paradox arises if the present masses are assumed to have been constant: the lower-mass star is the more evolved one, even though coeval isolated stars of higher mass normally exhaust core fuel sooner. The mass-luminosity relation gives the rough nuclear-lifetime scaling $t_{\mathrm{nuc}}\propto M/L$, decreasing strongly with mass. The resolution is binary mass-ratio reversal. The present donor began as the more massive star, evolved first, and expanded into its Roche lobe. Transferring much of its envelope made it less massive and made its initially less massive companion the present mass gainer. Their current masses therefore do not reveal their original evolutionary ordering.

On a Hertzsprung-Russell diagram, both components start on the zero-age main sequence. The initially more massive donor leaves the main sequence first, moving toward lower effective temperature and higher luminosity as a subgiant or red giant. During envelope stripping, it remains oversized and overluminous for its decreasing mass because its evolved core continues to supply energy. The accretor gains mass, moves to higher effective temperature and luminosity, and can undergo stellar rejuvenation if fresh hydrogen mixes into its core. After substantial envelope removal, the donor contracts to a hot stripped star; a sufficiently low-mass helium core ultimately becomes a helium white dwarf. The schematic below separates the two identities through the transfer episode rather than relabelling them when their masses cross.

During the long-lived slow-transfer phase, conservative binary mass transfer from the lighter donor to the heavier accretor widens the orbit: $d\log a=-2(1-q)d\log M_d>0$ for $q=M_d/M_a<1$ and $d{M}_d<0$. Transfer eventually stops when the donor's shrinking envelope can no longer maintain contact. The remnant can be a helium white dwarf if it never ignites helium, or a more massive helium-burning stripped star if it does. Later the mass gainer also leaves the main sequence. Reverse Roche-lobe overflow onto the compact remnant can lead to a common envelope, leaving a close double remnant after successful envelope ejection, or to merger. The detailed outcome depends on both masses, the separation, and how much matter and angular momentum escaped during earlier transfer.

The approximate mass-ratio boundary in the question has a stability interpretation. For an ideal fully convective donor star with adiabatic stellar radius response exponent ${\zeta }_{\mathrm{ad}}=-1/3$, the conservative Roche-radius approximation gives ${\zeta }_L=2q-5/3$. Dynamical stability of binary mass transfer requires ${\zeta }_{\mathrm{ad}}>{\zeta }_L$, so a long-lived stable system hasA more massive convective donor expands relative to its shrinking lobe under mass loss, favouring runaway transfer and a common envelope instead of a persistent Algol phase. This explains the approximate Algol mass-ratio stability limit in that model. It is not a universal observational boundary: a donor with a radiative envelope or a substantial evolved core has a different adiabatic response, and nonconservative loss changes the Roche-lobe response. Van Rensbergen and collaborators' observed and modelled Algol distributions include reported mass ratios above $0.7$ and discuss uncertainties in their determination. The literal claim that all Algols obey the same cutoff is therefore too strong.

A sufficiently wide system first reaches Roche-lobe overflow on the red giant branch, when the original donor is likely to have a deep convective envelope. Straightforward conservative overflow while that donor is still more massive is then prone to dynamical runaway and orbital contraction in a common envelope; it does not naturally yield a wide, long-lived Algol-like configuration. A plausible route is substantial earlier envelope loss through a stellar wind, possibly tidally enhanced stellar wind loss, reducing or reversing the mass ratio before contact. Wind mass transfer in a binary star can also increase the companion's mass. The lower donor mass, reduced envelope and larger core fraction make later transfer easier to stabilize. Alternatively, a detached pair with the same reversed evolutionary appearance may be interacting only through a wind and need never have undergone overflow. Its current width alone does not uniquely determine the initial orbit, but it indicates that prior mass loss or a more general nonconservative history must be considered, rather than applying the simple conservative convective-donor picture unchanged.

Assume nonrelativistic pressureless matter, an initial irrotational vector field of growing-mode linear cosmological density perturbations, a homogeneous expanding background, and no shell crossing. All gradients below refer to initial comoving coordinates. Let ${\rho }_0={\bar{\rho }}_m(t)a^3(t)={\bar{\rho }}_m(t_i)$, with $a(t_i)=1$, and normalize the linear growth factor by $D(t_i)=1$. The paper calls $D$ a growth rate, but it is the dimensionless growth factor; $\dot{D}$ is its time derivative.

Writing ${\mathbf{x}}_i$ for the actual position at $t_i$, the Zeldovich approximation is, to first order,This explicitly gives $\mathbf{x}(t_i)={\mathbf{x}}_i$. The usual notation $\mathbf{x}=\mathbf{q}+D\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{q})$ instead uses the uniform reference Lagrangian coordinate $\mathbf{q}$, with ${\mathbf{x}}_i=\mathbf{q}+\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{q})$. The two labels can be interchanged inside a first-order displacement, but not in the unperturbed position without the initial displacement correction.

To determine $\mathbf{s}$, mass conservation between the initial and current positions givesDemanding $\delta (t)=D(t){\delta }_i$ gives $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{s}=-{\delta }_i$. The irrotational vector field assumption makes $\mathbf{s}$ a gradient; the initial cosmological Poisson equation is ${\nabla }^2{\Phi }_i=4\pi G{\rho }_0{\delta }_i$. With the same boundary conditions for these potential equations, and after removing an irrelevant uniform translation,The evolution of $D$ follows from the linearized peculiar-motion equation $\ddot{\mathbf{x}}+2H\dot{\mathbf{x}}=-\nabla \Phi /a^2$. Since cosmological Poisson equation gives $\Phi (t)=(D/a){\Phi }_i$ to this order, substitution yields the linear growth equationThus the approximation extrapolates the linear growing displacement along a fixed initial direction, even as its density mapping becomes nonlinear.

The early spin of a dark-matter halo comes from an external gravitational torque on its nonspherical initial mass region. A uniform external acceleration moves its centre of mass without spinning it; the spatially varying tidal tensor exerts different forces on different parts. The tidal torque theory requires misalignment of the region's shape and the surrounding tidal field. A local irrotational vector field of velocity does not imply zero integrated angular momentum for a nonspherical region.

Put $\mathbf{y}={\mathbf{x}}_i-{\hat{\mathbf{x}}}_i$ and use the physical peculiar velocity $\mathbf{v}=a\dot{\mathbf{x}}$. The physical lever arm is $a(\mathbf{x}-\hat{\mathbf{x}})$, while a leading-order mass element is ${\rho }_0{d}^3{x}_i$. Substituting the velocity formula into the supplied definition of angular momentum about the centre of mass givesTerms from the perturbed mass measure are higher order. Subtracting the barycentre's velocity also changes nothing because ${\int }_{V_L}\mathbf{y}{d}^3{x}_i=0$ at this order.

Apply the divergence theorem componentwise:The antisymmetry of the Levi-Civita symbol kills the last term. Consequently, for the ordinary oriented comoving surface element $d\mathbf{S}$,The original PDF prints a different coefficient, $-\dot{D}/(4\pi G{\bar{\rho }}_m{a}^2)$. That coefficient does not follow from its own mass measure and velocity equation and has the wrong dimensions for total angular momentum. The corrected coefficient above also gives the time dependence consistent with the paper's later tensor expression; this is a source typo, not a TeX transcription issue.

For a spherical $V_L$ centered on its barycentre, the outward normal is parallel to $\mathbf{y}$, so $\mathbf{y}\times d\mathbf{S}=0$ pointwise. HenceFor an equipotential surface, ${\Phi }_i={\Phi }_{\ast }$ on ${\Sigma }_L$, andThereforeThe second conclusion holds for any boundary shape at this order, not just a sphere.

To extract the leading tidal torque, expand the initial peculiar gravitational potential about the barycentre using its Taylor series:The constant has no force; $\mathbf{g}$ has zero integrated torque because the first mass moment vanishes. With the mass second-moment tensorwe obtainThe second equality swaps the indices $k,l$ and uses the symmetry of both tensors. Define the initial acceleration tidal tensor byThen the formula in the question has exactly the stated sign:If one defines $T$ as the positive Hessian matrix of ${\Phi }_i$ instead, the displayed contraction has a plus sign. Defining the convention is essential. Also, the paper's $I$ is a mass second-moment tensor; the mechanical inertia tensor is $\mathrm{tr}(I)1-I$.

Only the anisotropic parts contribute: a multiple of the identity produces zero contraction with the Levi-Civita symbol. In axes where $I=\mathrm{diag}(I_1,I_2,I_3)$, for example,Thus a spherical region or tensors sharing principal axes have zero leading torque; unequal principal moments together with off-diagonal tidal components create spin. The Taylor series truncation assumes that higher spatial derivatives of the tidal field are sufficiently small across the region.

In an Einstein-de Sitter universe, $a\propto t^{2/3}$, $D\propto a$, and ${\bar{\rho }}_m\propto a^{-3}$. The initial $I$ and $T$ are time independent, soThis is early-time growth for fixed initial matter, before collapse invalidates the extrapolation. It does not predict indefinite linear spin growth for a virialized halo.

Two reasons for only approximate agreement with simulations are that nonlinear collapse and shell crossing change the trajectories and the tidal field, invalidating the first-order displacement and fixed leading tidal tensor; and that real halos undergo dark-matter halo mergers, anisotropic accretion, and exchange of material and angular momentum, so the halo identified at a later time need not be the same isolated collection of initial particles. These processes can change both the magnitude and the direction of the spin.

The singular isothermal sphere has one-dimensional velocity dispersion $\sigma$, density ${\rho }_{\mathrm{tot}}(r)={\sigma }^2/(2\pi G{r}^2)$, and enclosed mass $M(<R)=2{\sigma }^{2}R/G$. The gas mass inside $R$ is thereforeTaking the dynamical crossing time to be $t_{\mathrm{dyn}}\simeq R/\sigma$, the dynamical upper bound on black-hole fuelling isThe cancellation of $R$ is special to the singular isothermal sphere. At $\sigma =200\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, this is approximately

Use the stated M-sigma relation to set $M_{\mathrm{BH}}\simeq 3\times 10^8{M}_{\odot }$. Defining the Eddington accretion rate with a reference radiative efficiency of black-hole accretion ${\eta }_0$,Combining this with $M_{\mathrm{BH}}\propto {\sigma }^4$ givesThus a gas fraction of order $0.1$--$0.16$ and the usual ${\eta }_0=0.1$ give roughly $60$--$90$ times the Eddington accretion rate, below $100$ at the requested dispersion. Using a crossing time $R/(\sqrt{2}\sigma )$ instead changes the coefficient by $\sqrt{2}$, so this is an order-of-magnitude estimate rather than a sharp universal bound. The problem does not specify $f_{\mathrm{gas}}$ or the rate convention: without these choices, the numerical claim cannot be proved for every gas fraction. Defining the rate as $L_{\mathrm{Edd}}/c^2$ would make this ratio ten times larger.

This is extremely optimistic because it gives every gas element a direct path to the hole on a crossing time. In a real galaxy, gas must shed angular momentum, avoid conversion into stars through star formation, cool sufficiently to flow inward, and survive active-galactic-nucleus feedback. A rotating accretion disk generally transports material on a viscous timescale, much longer than the orbital crossing time. Most available gas need not reach the central hole. If the hole is supplied at approximately the Eddington accretion rate, only about one percent of this optimistic dynamical supply reaches it; the actual percentage depends on its luminosity and duty cycle, so the bound alone is not a measurement of the fuelling efficiency.

For the temperature jump, use Bondi accretion as the local hot-gas estimate:Assuming the initial gas had $c_s\sim \sigma$, its density has not yet changed, and its polytropic coefficient remains comparable, heating to $c_{s,\mathrm{feed}}\sim 10\sigma$ givesThe capture radius $G{M}_{\mathrm{BH}}/c_s^2$ also shrinks by about $100$. Subsequent expansion can lower the density and suppress the mass accretion rate further. The result illustrates thermal suppression of black-hole accretion and negative active-galactic-nucleus feedback: vigorous activity can shut off its own gas supply. The factor $10^{-3}$ is conditional on the fixed-density comparison; the previous dynamical upper bound is not itself an actual pre-heating Bondi rate.

Work in the rest frame of the hole and neglect stellar velocities compared with $v$. In addition to $v\gg {\sigma }_{\ast }$, assume the galactic encounter speed is nonrelativistic, $v\ll c$. Treat a star as a test particle with specific angular momentum $\ell =bv$. At its pericentre $r_{\min }$, its radial velocity vanishes. Conservation of energy and conservation of angular momentum giveThe second term is gravitational focusing. For the rough Newtonian estimate in the question, assume capture when the pericentre reaches the Schwarzschild radius, $r_S=2G{M}_{\mathrm{BH}}/c^2$. It follows thatThe approximation keeps the focusing term because $v\ll c$.

Let ${\rho }_{\ast }=m{n}_{\ast }$ be the stellar mass density. Multiplying the geometric collision cross-section by the incoming mass flux gives the collisionless black-hole capture rateFor a supersonic gas with negligible sound speed, Bondi--Hoyle--Lyttleton accretion has capture radius $r_a=2G{M}_{\mathrm{BH}}/v^2$ and rateConsequentlyFor comparable densities and $v=200\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, the suppression is approximately $4\times 10^{-7}$. Gas can collide, dissipate orbital energy, and be captured from a region of size $GM/v^2$; collisionless particles generally leave on an unbound orbit unless their angular momentum is small enough for direct capture. Chandrasekhar dynamical friction can slow the hole by transferring energy to a stellar wake, but does not mean that the stars producing that wake are swallowed.

There is an important accuracy limitation in the requested numerical coefficient. Newtonian orbital mechanics evaluated at a relativistic event horizon cannot give the exact capture boundary. In Schwarzschild spacetime, a slowly incoming massive particle has dimensionless energy $\mathcal{E}\simeq 1$ and timelike geodesic effective potentialThe double turning point satisfying $V=1$ and $dV/dr=0$ occurs at $r=4r_g$ and $\ell =4G{M}_{\mathrm{BH}}/c$. The exact low-speed boundary is therefore $b_{\mathrm{cap}}\simeq 4G{M}_{\mathrm{BH}}/(cv)$, twice the rough value; it makes the rate ratio $4({\rho }_{\ast }/{\rho }_g)(v/c{)}^2$. The key suppression scaling is unchanged.

Direct capture of ordinary stars or dark matter is therefore an inefficient route to rapid growth of a supermassive black hole under these conditions. Tidal disruption events can capture stellar debris without swallowing an intact point-like star, and special dense environments can modify the supply. These qualifications do not make collisionless capture equivalent to dissipative gas accretion.

In cylindrical coordinates,The screw transformationleaves $r$ and $\varphi -kz$ fixed, so it is the helical symmetry of a potential. Its infinitesimal generator has ${\xi }_z=1$ and ${\xi }_{\varphi }=k$. Noether's theorem therefore gives the conserved quantityThis is a linear combination of axial linear momentum and axial angular momentum.

Let $e_1,e_2,e_3$ be a principal body frame, let $I_1,I_2,I_3$ be the corresponding principal moments of inertia, and write the angular velocity as $\mathbf{\omega }={\sum }_i{\omega }_i{e}_i$. The body-frame components of the angular momentum areNo external torque acts, so $\mathbf{L}$ is constant in the fixed space frame. Since a body-fixed basis vector satisfies ${\dot{e}}_i=\mathbf{\omega }\times e_i$,Taking body-frame components gives the Euler equations for a torque-free rigid body:

Multiply the three Euler equations for a torque-free rigid body by ${\omega }_1,{\omega }_2,{\omega }_3$ and add. The cubic terms cancel, giving conservation of the rotational kinetic energyInstead multiply the equations by $I_1{\omega }_1,I_2{\omega }_2,I_3{\omega }_3$ and add. The cubic terms again cancel, givingthe squared magnitude of the conserved angular momentum. For an asymmetric body these two quadratic forms are not proportional, so the torque-free rigid-body invariants are independent.

The central force conserves angular momentum. The initial impact parameter gives $L=ub$, while at closest approach the velocity is transverse and $L=wp$. Thus $u=wp/b$. Conservation of energy givesUnder $u^2\gg 2k/R$, neglect the initial potential term and substitute $u=wp/b$:Consequently

The repulsive force is $\mathbf{F}=k\mathbf{r}/r^3=-\nabla (k/r)$, so the Hamiltonian isThe Hamilton's equations give $\dot{\mathbf{r}}=\mathbf{p}/m$ and $\dot{\mathbf{p}}=k\mathbf{r}/r^3$. Consequentlyso the angular momentum is conserved. Moreover,It follows that the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector $\mathbf{A}=\mathbf{p}\times \mathbf{L}+mk\hat{\mathbf{r}}$ is conserved. By the Hamiltonian conservation law, these time derivatives are exactly $\{\mathbf{L},H\}$ and $\{\mathbf{A},H\}$, so both Poisson brackets vanish.

The integrals of motion are the energy $H$, the components of $\mathbf{L}$, and the components of $\mathbf{A}$, subject toTaking the dot product of $\mathbf{A}$ with $\hat{\mathbf{r}}$ givesTherefore the polar equation of a repulsive inverse-square orbit iswhere $\lambda =L^2/(mk)\ge 0$ and $e=A/(mk)\ge 0$. For a nonradial physical scattering orbit $H>0$, the identity above gives $e>1$, as expected for a hyperbolic Kepler orbit.

Write the position of a mass element relative to the center of mass as $\mathbf{r}$, so its inertial-frame velocity is $\dot{\mathbf{X}}+\mathbf{\omega }\times \mathbf{r}$. The center-of-mass identity $\int \mathbf{r}dm=0$ removes all cross terms. Define the inertia tensor about the center of mass byThe total angular momentum about the origin and kinetic energy are then

Let $\rho (r)=C{r}^{-1}\sin (\pi r/R)$. Spherical symmetry makes $I=I_{0}1$. The mass normalization isso $C=M/(4R^2)$. A moment about any diameter isTherefore

The torque about the origin isSince $\dot{L}=\tau$, the angular momentum $L=mr\times \dot{r}$ is conserved. The force is the negative gradient of the inverse-square potentialso the conserved energy isDirectly, $\dot{E}=\dot{r}\cdot (m\ddot{r}+kmr/r^3)=0$.

Motion under a central force is planar. In plane polar coordinates, the radial component of the acceleration is $\ddot{r}-r{\dot{\theta }}^2$, soThe conserved specific angular momentum is $h=r^2\dot{\theta }$. Substitution of $\dot{\theta }=h/r^2$ yieldsThe last term is the centrifugal part of the radial effective potential.

The same absorption and re-emission that produce radial radiation pressure also produce Poynting–Robertson drag. This velocity-dependent force removes specific orbital energy and angular momentum, destroys the exact Jacobi constant, and turns the formal equilibrium points into slowly drifting configurations. Stellar-wind drag can provide a similar correction.