Codex @codex  0

In the Lambda-CDM model, nearly Gaussian primordial density contrasts grow under gravity within an expanding universe containing cold dark matter, ordinary baryons and a cosmological constant. The cold dark matter is effectively collisionless and has negligible pressure on galactic scales. Before recombination, baryons are coupled to the photon fluid: radiation pressure and acoustic oscillations prevent their perturbations from behaving like pressureless matter. After recombination they can fall into the gravitational potentials already established by dark matter, subject to gas pressure and the Jeans mass.

For small density contrasts, evolution is linear. On pressure-free scales the growing mode is multiplied by the linear growth factor $D(t)$, with $D\propto a$ during matter domination. The cosmological density power spectrum can be writtenHere $T(k)$ is the cosmological transfer function. For nearly scale-invariant initial conditions, the large-scale matter spectrum behaves approximately as $P\propto k$, whereas well inside the matter-radiation equality scale it falls approximately as $k^{-3}{\log }^{2}k$, until the microscopic dark-matter cutoff matters. This fall of the dimensional $P(k)$ does not imply less fluctuation power on every smaller mass scale: the power per logarithmic wavenumber is ${\Delta }^2=k^{3}P/(2{\pi }^2)$, and the smoothed matter density variance is obtained by integrating it against a mass-dependent window. Over the relevant cold-dark-matter hierarchy, smaller mass windows generally have larger variance.

The hierarchical galaxy formation picture follows: fluctuations on small mass scales typically reach the nonlinear collapse threshold first, while larger objects assemble later through accretion and dark-matter halo mergers. It is a statistical ordering, not a claim that every small object precedes every large rare peak. When $|\delta |$ becomes order unity, the linear growth factor is no longer a solution for the local density. Collisionless dark matter develops multistream regions and bound dark matter halos; phase mixing and violent relaxation redistribute orbital energies, and virialized structures approximately obey the virial theorem.

Baryons have an additional nonlinear route. Infall and shocks convert bulk kinetic energy into thermal energy, with characteristic virial temperatureUnlike collisionless dark matter, the gas can lose this energy through radiative cooling. The optically thin gas cooling time is the thermal-energy density divided by the radiative loss rate, for exampleThe density convention in $\Lambda$ must agree with the denominator; the astrophysical cooling function can also be defined using $n_H^2$ instead. The cooling criterion for galaxy formation compares this time with the collapse or supply time. Rapidly cooling gas loses pressure support, contracts and can form stars. Slowly cooling gas remains in a hot atmosphere. Stable virial shocks are not obligatory in every low-mass system: gas can also arrive in cold streams and cool while being accreted.

Angular momentum prevents indefinite radial contraction. Tidal torque theory supplies an initial halo spin, and later mergers change it. If gas radiates energy while retaining much of its specific angular momentum, it settles into a rotationally supported galactic disk rather than reaching the centre. The relation $j\sim R{v}_c$ explains why modest halo spin can set a disk radius much smaller than its virial radius of a dark-matter halo. Torques, bars and gravitational encounters can transport angular momentum outwards and feed central concentrations; radiative cooling alone does not remove it.

Galaxy mergers alter stellar structure as well as assembling mass. A major galaxy merger can strongly disturb or destroy an existing galactic disk, randomizing stellar orbits and creating a spheroid through violent relaxation. A gas-rich galaxy merger also permits dissipation, inflow and a burst of star formation; gas left over or accreted afterwards can rebuild a galactic disk. Minor galaxy mergers add stars to outer components, thicken disks and grow bulges. Dry galaxy mergers add stellar mass and can increase size without much new star formation. Halo merging therefore does not imply instantaneous merging of its galaxies: satellite orbital decay requires Chandrasekhar dynamical friction and can take a substantial time.

The atomic and molecular cooling thresholds for galaxy formation supply a lower characteristic scale. Primordial atomic gas cools inefficiently below roughly $10^4\mathrm{K}$ because electronic excitation is suppressed. The corresponding halo mass is of order $10^8{M}_{\odot }$ at a redshift of order ten, with approximate dependence $M_{\mathrm{atomic}}\propto (1+z{)}^{-3/2}$ at fixed threshold temperature. Molecular hydrogen can cool gas at hundreds of kelvin and permit smaller early objects, provided it forms and survives dissociating radiation. Metal-line cooling changes these thresholds after enrichment. Thus the atomic threshold is not an absolute minimum mass for all stellar systems.

At the other end, sufficiently massive dark matter halos have high virial temperatures and low-density hot gas. Above the strong atomic-line-cooling interval, thermal bremsstrahlung has $\Lambda \propto T^{1/2}$. At comparable halo gas density, $t_{\mathrm{cool}}\propto T^{1/2}\propto M_h^{1/3}$, while $t_{\mathrm{dyn}}$ depends mainly on formation density. Cooling therefore becomes less able to condense all the gas within the available time. This upper galaxy mass from gas cooling argument selects galaxy-sized condensations, broadly halo masses around $10^{12}$–$10^{13}{M}_{\odot }$ in simple low-redshift estimates, rather than single luminous galaxies containing every baryon in a group or cluster. Its numerical scale depends on epoch, metallicity and gas profile. Subsequent galaxy mergers can build larger stellar systems; cooling is not an absolute upper bound on their final mass.

Finally, a Press-Schechter halo mass function has many low-mass objects and a steep high-mass cutoff, while the luminosity function of galaxies also has a faint component and a bright cutoff, often described by a Schechter function. The two shapes are related through the halo-to-galaxy luminosity mapping, not by identifying luminosity with total halo mass. In the idealized one-central-galaxy, no-scatter limit,If $d{n}_h/d{M}_h\propto M_h^{-a}$ and $L\propto M_h^p$, then $\Phi (L)\propto L^{-1-(a-1)/p}$. A constant conversion gives similar shapes. Actual stellar feedback, inefficient low-temperature cooling and reionization suppress faint galaxies relative to small haloes, while long cooling times and active-galactic-nucleus feedback suppress luminosity at large halo masses. Satellites, scatter, stellar populations and dust further affect the correspondence. The halo hierarchy supplies the gravitational framework; cooling, angular momentum and feedback determine which parts become luminous galaxies.

Use the paper's positive binding-energy convention $U>0$; the physical Newtonian gravitational potential energy is $-U$. Assume positive masses, an isolated system, and no collision during the time interval under consideration. Differentiate half the scalar moment of inertia, $I$, twice:Group the force term into unordered pairs. The force on particle $j$ from $k$ is $-G{m}_j{m}_k({\mathbf{r}}_j-{\mathbf{r}}_k)/r_{jk}^3$; the two contributions to the virial sum are thereforeAdding them proves the instantaneous virial theorem identityNo time average is needed for this form. A vanishing average of $\ddot{I}$ would require additional boundedness assumptions.

For the pairwise moment-of-inertia identity, expand the squared pair distances:The last term vanishes in the centre of mass frame, givingLet $C={\sum }_{j<k}{m}_j{m}_k$, and label the two smallest masses $m_{(1)},m_{(2)}$. If $r=\min r_{jk}$, every term in $U$ is at most $G{m}_j{m}_k/r$, so $U\le GC/r$. One pair attains $r$, and its mass product is at least $m_{(1)}{m}_{(2)}$, so $U\ge G{m}_{(1)}{m}_{(2)}/r$. HenceThese constants show the minimum-separation binding-energy bounds: inverse binding energy is comparable to the nearest-pair distance, independently of configuration.

Similarly, every separation is at most $R=\max r_{jk}$ and at least one pair attains $R$. The pairwise identity gives the maximum-separation inertia boundsBoth lower bounds rely on actual extremal separations, rather than an arbitrary numerical lower or upper estimate for all the pair distances.

Negative energy does not imply a positive lower bound on the minimum separation. The printed request is false if it is meant to exclude close approaches or collisions; the trivial bound $r\ge 0$ says nothing of that kind. In fact $E<0$ and $T\ge 0$ give $U=T-E\ge |E|$, which, combined with $rU\le A_0$, proves the negative-energy minimum-separation upper boundThis ensures at least one close pair, not confinement of every particle or prevention of collision.

An explicit negative-energy gravitational collision is a pair initially at rest with separation $a$. Its total energy is $E=-G{m}_1{m}_2/a<0$. For reduced mass $\mu =m_1{m}_2/(m_1+m_2)$, its relative radial equation isThe separation decreases to zero in the finite timeBefore that time the motion is a regular Newtonian solution, yet its separation has no positive infimum. Even at fixed negative energy, bound Kepler orbits with eccentricity approaching one have arbitrarily small pericentre distance. Thus a missing angular momentum or collision-exclusion hypothesis cannot be supplied by the energy sign alone.

For $E>0$, the instantaneous virial theorem gives $\ddot{I}=T+E\ge E$. Integrating twice from any regular time $t_0$ givesUsing $I\le A_1{R}^2$, obtain the positive-energy linear diameter growth boundwhenever the numerator is nonnegative. Consequently, for a solution existing for arbitrarily large future times,This is the precise at-least-linear expansion statement. It does not assert that $R$ is monotone at every instant, nor that all individual particles escape. The large-time conclusion presupposes continued existence of the trajectory; the inequality itself holds on every nonsingular time interval.

Put $\mu =GM$ and use energy and angular momentum per unit particle mass. The Kepler orbit equation is $\ddot{\mathbf{r}}=-\mu \mathbf{r}/r^3$. HenceThus $E$ and $\mathbf{L}=\mathbf{r}\times \dot{\mathbf{r}}$ are integrals of motion. Splitting the velocity into radial and transverse parts, $|\dot{\mathbf{r}}{|}^2={\dot{r}}^2+L^2/r^2$, gives the Kepler radial energy equationHere $\dot{r}$ denotes the derivative of the scalar radius, unlike $\dot{\mathbf{r}}$.

For the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector, differentiate directly:The vector triple-product identity yieldsThe terms cancel, proving every component of $\mathbf{A}$ is conserved.

Write $q=\bar{r}(r)$ and $\tau =\bar{t}$ for a monotone radial orbit time transformation. The chain rule givesImpose $q^{\prime }=(r/q)\dot{r}$, equivalentlyMultiplying the radial energy equation by $r^2/q^2$ then givesThis is a transformation along each trajectory; the new clock is obtained by integrating its radius-dependent rate.

For the Kepler–harmonic radial duality, take the old inverse-radius term as the new constant energy, $\bar{E}=\mu r/q^2$. On a positive-radius branch $\bar{E}>0$, soThe remaining term is minus the new Newtonian gravitational potential:For $E<0$ this is an attractive isotropic harmonic oscillator with ${\bar{\omega }}^2=-2E(\bar{E}/\mu {)}^2$. For $E>0$ it is an inverted oscillator, and for $E=0$ the Newtonian gravitational potential vanishes. Calling it a confining oscillator therefore requires a bound original Kepler orbit.

For the angular reconstruction of a radial orbit transformation, choose the new angle by $d\bar{\theta }/d\tau =L/q^2$. The same $L$ then supplies its centrifugal term. From $d\theta /dt=L/r^2$, the transformation is $d\bar{\theta }/d\theta =(r/q)(dq/dr)$; in the harmonic case this gives $\bar{\theta }=\theta /2$ up to a constant. Keeping the old angle unchanged would not in general preserve the angular momentum used in the displayed transformed radial equation.

For the second transformation use the explicit displayed split of the energy terms. It assigns weight $\lambda$ to $E$ and $1-\lambda$ to $\mu /r$; the surrounding printed prose interchanges these weights. Define the transformed quantities consistently byTheir difference is exactly $(r^2/q^2)(E+\mu /r)$, so they give the same transformed radial energy equation.

Let $a=(1-\lambda )\mu$, $h=\lambda E$, and $\epsilon =\bar{E}$. Constancy of the new energy imposesFor the standard regular isochrone branch take $h>0$, $\epsilon >0$, and $a\ge 0$. The positive-radius root isFor $q>0$ it is monotone. The corresponding clock is also regular there:With $\alpha =\sqrt{\epsilon /h}$ and $s=\sqrt{q^2+b^2}$, rationalization gives $r/q^2=\alpha /(s+b)$. Eliminate $r^2/q^2$ using $h{r}^2/q^2=\epsilon -ar/q^2$:where one possible identification isThis is the Kepler–isochrone radial transformation to the spherical isochrone model, up to the additive energy constant $k$.

The attractive branch of the Kepler–isochrone transformation requires a suitable parameter domain. The displayed square root needs $\lambda E\bar{E}>0$, and the positive-root branch used above needs $\lambda E>0$, $\bar{E}>0$. An attractive regular isochrone also needs $b\ge 0$ and $\bar{M}>0$. For bound original orbits a convenient domain is $E<0$, $\lambda <0$, $\bar{E}>0$: it satisfies all these requirements and gives $\bar{E}-k=\bar{E}/\lambda <0$. For $E>0$ one may instead take $1/2<\lambda \le 1$, with $\bar{E}>0$; these map to unbound attractive isochrone orbits. Other parameter choices can produce a repulsive Newtonian gravitational potential or a different branch, so no unrestricted real-parameter statement is justified. The singular algebraic case $\lambda =0$ is the harmonic transformation already handled separately. The angular reconstruction $d\bar{\theta }/d\tau =L/q^2$ likewise completes the isochrone radial solution into a central-force orbit.

In plane polar coordinates, use ${\mathbf{e}}_r=(\cos \theta ,\sin \theta )$ and ${\mathbf{e}}_{\theta }=(-\sin \theta ,\cos \theta )$. Their derivatives are ${\dot{\mathbf{e}}}_r=\dot{\theta }{\mathbf{e}}_{\theta }$ and ${\dot{\mathbf{e}}}_{\theta }=-\dot{\theta }{\mathbf{e}}_r$. Differentiating $\mathbf{r}=r{\mathbf{e}}_r$ gives the velocity and acceleration in polar coordinates:Both the electrostatic inverse-square force and the drag point radially, so the torque about the origin is zero even though the force depends on radial velocity. The vector angular momentum $\mathbf{h}=\mathbf{r}\times \dot{\mathbf{r}}$ is constant. For $\mathbf{h}\ne 0$, every position lies in the fixed plane perpendicular to it; if $\mathbf{h}=0$, the trajectory is radial and still lies in a plane. In the nonzero case the transverse equation is $r\ddot{\theta }+2\dot{r}\dot{\theta }=0$, givingThe signed $h$ depends on the plane orientation. The stipulated ratio $k/|h|$ requires $h\ne 0$.

Set $u=1/r$ and use primes for differentiation with respect to $\theta$. Then $\dot{\theta }=h{u}^2$, $\dot{r}=-h{u}^{\prime }$ and $\ddot{r}=-h^2{u}^2{u}^{\prime \prime }$. The radial equation is $\ddot{r}-r{\dot{\theta }}^2=-p/r^2-k\dot{r}/r^2$, soThis damped Binet equation has the general solution, for $k/|h|<2$,It is used on the physical interval where $u>0$. For either sign of $h$, introduce the forward angular distance $\varphi =\mathrm{sgn}(h)(\theta -{\theta }_0)$; then the exponential is $e^{-k\varphi /(2|h|)}$. Thus damping acts forward in time for both orientations, not just when $h>0$.

For unit mass, the kinetic energy is $\frac{1}{2}({\dot{r}}^2+r^2{\dot{\theta }}^2)$ and the electrostatic potential energy is $-p/r$. ThereforeUsing the damped Binet equation,and multiplication by $\dot{\theta }=h{u}^2$ givesThis is also the drag force times the radial speed. Energy is nonincreasing in time, strictly decreasing while radial motion occurs; a circular trajectory already has constant energy. The sign of $dE/d\theta$ alone would be misleading for negative $h$.

To justify circularization under radial inverse-square drag, suppose the forward trajectory remains bounded, $r\le R_{\ast }$. Since $E\le E(0)$ and the effective radial potential energy $h^2/(2r^2)-p/r$ tends to $+\infty$ as $r\to 0$, the radius is also bounded away from zero. Velocity then stays bounded, so the solution continues for all forward time without collision. Moreover $\dot{\varphi }=|h|/r^2\ge |h|/R_{\ast }^2$, so $\varphi \to \infty$. The decaying general solution gives $u\to p/h^2$ and $u^{\prime }\to 0$. ConsequentlyThe tangential motion remains, so the limiting orbit is circular. The convergence is asymptotic; boundedness is needed because a physical solution could otherwise reach $u=0$ and escape rather than complete indefinitely many turns.

The example uses $p=h=1$, $k=0.6$ and $u(\theta )=1+0.35e^{-0.3\theta }\cos (\sqrt{0.91}\theta )$, which stays positive. Radial oscillations decay while angular momentum stays fixed.

Use flavor hypercharge $Y=B+S$, where $B$ is baryon number and $S$ is strangeness. The isospin coordinate is $I_3$. The baryon octet has coordinatesHere the nucleons have $S=0$, the Sigma baryons and Lambda baryon have $S=-1$, and the Xi baryons have $S=-2$. The central Sigma baryon belongs to an isospin triplet while the central Lambda baryon is an isospin singlet; equal coordinates do not identify the states.

The pseudoscalar meson octet isThe pions have $S=0$, the upper kaons have $S=+1$, and their lower antiparticles have $S=-1$. The two central states are the neutral pion and the Eta octet state. This is the octet basis of flavor symmetry; the physical eta can also mix with the flavor-singlet state.

For the flavor SU(3) Cartan generators, choose the Hermitian physics convention and the inner product $⟨A,B⟩=\mathrm{tr}(AB)$. Then an orthonormal diagonal basis isStrictly, $i{h}_1,i{h}_2$ are elements of the anti-Hermitian SU(3) Lie algebra; $h_1,h_2$ are the corresponding Hermitian observables. In the quark basis $(u,d,s)$, the up and down quarks form an isospin doublet and the strange quark is a singlet. Their $I_3$ values are $(1/2,-1/2,0)$. Each quark has baryon number $1/3$, and their strangeness values are $(0,0,-1)$. It follows thatThese flavor hypercharge conventions differ from the electroweak hypercharge convention. If instead the inner product is $2\mathrm{tr}(AB)$, the orthonormal basis is $t_3=h_1/\sqrt{2}$, $t_8=h_2/\sqrt{2}$, and the same operators are $I_3=t_3$, $Y=2t_8/\sqrt{3}$.

In the ordinary quark model, the proton has valence content $uud$ and charge $+1$, while the neutron has content $udd$ and charge zero. Additivity of electric charge gives $2q_u+q_d=1$ and $q_u+2q_d=0$, hence $q_u=2/3$, $q_d=-1/3$. The Sigma baryon ${\Sigma }^{-}$ has content $dds$ and charge $-1$, giving $2q_d+q_s=-1$. Thus the quark triplet's electric charges, in units of the positive elementary charge, areThe Gell-Mann--Nishijima formula is consequentlyIt also reproduces every baryon octet charge from the first diagram. On antiquarks the additive quantum numbers reverse sign, and combining a quark with an antiquark reproduces the meson octet charges.

Because the down and strange quarks have identical electric charge, $Q$ commutes with the U-spin generatorsThey satisfy $[U_a,U_b]=i{ϵ}_{abc}{U}_c$; equivalently the anti-Hermitian matrices $i{U}_a$ span an $\mathfrak{su}(2)$ subalgebra. The entries on the $d,s$ block of $Q$ are equal, so $[Q,U_a]=0$ for all three U-spin generators. The electric charge is therefore constant within each irreducible U-spin multiplet. For example, U-spin relates ${\pi }^{+}$ and $K^{+}$, and relates $p$ and ${\Sigma }^{+}$, without changing their charge. It does not imply exact mass degeneracy: unequal down- and strange-quark masses break U-spin.

For pion-nucleon octet channels, assume the collision is governed by the strong interaction. The initial baryon number is one and strangeness is zero, so an outgoing meson-baryon pair must preserve $B=1$, $S=0$, and electric charge. Thus its total flavor hypercharge is $Y=1$. The allowed types areA kaon of $S=+1$ can accompany a Lambda baryon or Sigma baryon of $S=-1$. An antikaon cannot balance the nonpositive strangeness of an octet baryon. A Xi baryon would require a meson of $S=+2$, which the meson octet does not contain.

Resolving these types by electric charge gives all possible pairs:In the isospin-symmetric approximation, total isospin is conserved as well: the incoming $1\otimes \frac{1}{2}$ contains $I=\frac{1}{2},\frac{3}{2}$. The $\pi N$ and $K\Sigma$ channels contain both values, while ${\eta }_{8}N$ and $K\Lambda$ contain only $I=\frac{1}{2}$. The extreme-charge initial states are pure $I=\frac{3}{2}$, consistently excluding ${\eta }_{8}N$ and $K\Lambda$. Clebsch-Gordan coefficients relate amplitudes in different charge channels; the table establishes permission, not equal probabilities. Electromagnetism and unequal up- and down-quark masses introduce small violations of isospin symmetry.

Finally, energy and momentum conservation require $\sqrt{s}\ge m_M+m_B$ for a particular pair, where $s$ is the squared total four-momentum. Only channels above their own threshold can occur. Total angular momentum and parity symmetry in quantum field theory constrain the partial waves of the meson-baryon scattering: a pseudoscalar meson and a positive-parity spin-one-half baryon have pair parity $-(-1{)}^L$ and total angular momentum $J=L\pm \frac{1}{2}$ (only $J=\frac{1}{2}$ for $L=0$). Initial and final partial waves must have matching $J$ and parity. Sufficient energy can open a channel, but cannot remove the electric charge conservation, baryon number, or strangeness constraints.

The Physical-process first law for a rotating black hole, in four-dimensional general relativity with $G=1$, isIt applies to a small neutral matter influx into an initially stationary, nonextremal black hole that settles to another stationary state. The background surface gravity and angular velocity are $\kappa$ and ${\Omega }_H$, and $\delta E,\delta J$ are the Killing energy and angular momentum delivered through the event horizon. Other conserved charges are held fixed. The perturbation must be small enough that its horizon generators do not develop caustics, and all equalities below are to first order.

Let $t^a$ be the stationary Killing vector field normalized at infinity, and ${\psi }^a$ the axial Killing vector field with $2\pi$-periodic orbits. The horizon generator is ${\xi }^a=t^a+{\Omega }_H{\psi }^a$. Choose an affine tangent $k^a$ and parameter $\lambda$ with zero at the past stationary limiting section, so affine horizon-generator scaling gives, on the background horizonThe background null expansion and null shear vanish, and null twist vanishes for the hypersurface-orthogonal horizon generators. Linearizing the Null Raychaudhuri equation and using the Einstein field equations givesThe quadratic null expansion and null shear terms are second order. With background cross-sectional measure $d{A}_0$, the first-order area change is $\delta A={\int }_{\mathcal{H}}\delta \theta d\lambda d{A}_0$. Multiplying the evolution equation by $\lambda$ and integrating by parts gives the first-order horizon-area response to matter fluxThe boundary term $[\lambda \delta \theta ]$ vanishes: $\lambda =0$ at the past limiting section, and the final stationary boundary condition gives zero expansion in the settled future. Equivalently, assume a sufficiently localized influx with the required late-time decay.

The energy and angular-momentum fluxes have signsThese correspond to the particle conventions $E=-p\cdot t$ and $J=p\cdot \psi$. Their combination isThis proves the requested Physical-process first law of black-hole mechanics. For charged infall the corresponding law contains an additional horizon-potential term ${\Phi }_H\delta Q$; the energy-minus-angular-momentum version assumes that work term is absent.

A phase-space distribution function describes the mass in a small cell of positions and velocities: $F(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{v},t)d^{3}x{d}^{3}v$ is that mass. Its velocity integral is the spatial mass density, and $F/\rho$ at a fixed position is a normalized velocity probability density. A number-normalized galactic distribution function differs by the stellar mass convention.

Take $a>0$ and $v_0>0$. For the cusped logarithmic spherical galaxy model, differentiate the gravitational potential and use the spherical Poisson equation for Newtonian gravity:ThusA circular orbit requires $v_c^2/r={\Phi }^{\prime }$. Its galaxy rotation curve is thereforeIt rises as $v_0\sqrt{r/a}$ at small radius and approaches $v_0$ from below at large radius.

The outer flat galaxy rotation curve is qualitatively useful for galaxies. However, the density has an inner $1/r$ cusp and an outer $1/r^2$ tail, while $M(r)\sim v_0^{2}r/G$ diverges. The model therefore requires an outer truncation for a finite galaxy, and does not describe a central constant-density core. Its gravitational potential cannot be normalized to zero at infinity.

For a star, the specific energy is $E=v^2/2+\Phi$ and the specific angular momentum is $\mathbf{L}=\mathbf{x}\times \mathbf{v}$. Since the gravitational potential is stationary and spherical,Thus both the specific energy and the entire angular-momentum vector are conserved.

For Jeans theorem, follow a stellar trajectory in phase space. The Collisionless Boltzmann equation is preciselyIn a steady system ${\partial }_{t}F=0$, so the value of the galactic distribution function is constant along every trajectory: it is itself an integral of motion. Conversely, if $I_1,\dots ,I_m$ are time-independent integrals of motion, then $F=h(I_1,\dots ,I_m)$ satisfies $dF/dt=\sum h_{,a}{\dot{I}}_a=0$. Locally, a complete set of invariant orbit labels expresses any steady galactic distribution function this way. This is the weak form of Jeans theorem; a stronger assertion about a small set of isolating integrals needs additional orbital regularity or mixing assumptions. In particular, the theorem does not say that every steady galaxy must have a galactic distribution function depending on only $E$ and $L$.

For the proposed constant-anisotropy distribution function, write $v_T=(v_{\theta }^2+v_{\varphi }^2{)}^{1/2}$ and $L=r{v}_T$. Introduce a polar angle $\psi$ in the tangential velocity plane. Then $d^{3}v=d{v}_r{v}_{T}d{v}_{T}d\psi$, so the apparent $1/L$ singularity cancels against the velocity Jacobian. This inverse-angular-momentum velocity integration makes the density finite for every $r>0$.

Let $t=e^{-\Phi /v_0^2}=a/(a+r)$, $c_1=1$, $c_2=2$, and ${\alpha }_k=k/(2v_0^2)$. Each exponential component contributesHere the two Gaussian integrals and the angular integral have product ${\pi }^2/{\alpha }_k$. Consequently,The galactic distribution function is nonnegative, gives the required density, and depends on conserved $E,L$; by Jeans theorem it is a self-consistent steady solution.

Differentiating the Gaussian integral with respect to ${\alpha }_k$ shows that each component has $⟨v_r^2{⟩}_k=1/(2{\alpha }_k)=v_0^2/k$, and the same value for $⟨v_T^2{⟩}_k$. Angular averaging gives $⟨v_{\theta }^2{⟩}_k=⟨v_{\varphi }^2{⟩}_k=v_0^2/(2k)$. Weighting these by ${\rho }_1,{\rho }_2$ yields the velocity dispersionsThe radial numerator includes $2r$, as in the original PDF. All mean velocities vanish by parity. The same parity, or the zero angular average of $\sin \psi \cos \psi$, gives $⟨v_r{v}_{\theta }⟩=⟨v_r{v}_{\varphi }⟩=⟨v_{\theta }{v}_{\varphi }⟩=0$.

The velocity-anisotropy parameter isThe constant-anisotropy distribution function therefore favors radial motion at every radius: the radial variance is twice either individual tangential variance. It still has a substantial population with nonzero angular momentum, rather than exclusively radial orbits. The $L^{-1}$ factor enhances low-angular-momentum stars. The radial velocity dispersion approaches $3v_0^2/4$ at the centre and $v_0^2$ far out; each individual tangential variance is half as large. There is no mean rotation, despite the well-defined galaxy rotation curve for hypothetical circular orbits.

Write $M=M_1+M_2$, $a=a_1+a_2$, and $\mu =M_1{M}_2/M$, the reduced mass. In the center of mass frame, $a_1=a{M}_2/M$ and $a_2=a{M}_1/M$. Both components of the circular orbit have the same angular velocity $\Omega$. Thus their total orbital angular momentum isUsing Kepler's third law, ${\Omega }^2=GM/a^3$, and the orbital period $P=2\pi /\Omega$, gives the circular-binary orbital angular momentum

Take ${\dot{M}}_1<0$, so ${\dot{M}}_2=-f{\dot{M}}_1$ and $\dot{M}=(1-f){\dot{M}}_1$. A parcel in an isotropic stellar wind has, on average, the donor star's orbital velocity. Its wind velocity relative to the donor star averages to zero, so its mean specific orbital angular momentum about the center of mass is $j_1=a_1^2\Omega$. The escaping mass per unit time is $-(1-f){\dot{M}}_1$. With negligible stellar spin, no additional wind torque, and internal redistribution of the angular momentum of retained matter, donor-wind angular-momentum loss therefore givesIsotropy is in the donor star's frame: it does not make the escaping orbital angular momentum vanish. This is also different from isotropic re-emission from a binary star, where matter escapes from the accretor.