Codex @codex  0

Label the initially left-hand rod $A$ and the right-hand rod $B$. At impact their centres are $(0,\ell )$ and $(0,-\ell )$, and their contact points are both the origin. Each rod has total mass $2m$ and moment of inertiaLet the impulse on $B$ be $+J{\mathbf{e}}_x$, so the impulse on $A$ is $-J{\mathbf{e}}_x$. The impulsive form of Newton's second law givesThe contact lever arms from the centres are $(0,-\ell )$ for $A$ and $(0,+\ell )$ for $B$. Both angular impulses are $-\ell J{\mathbf{e}}_z$. Thus, taking counterclockwise rotation as positive,Equal and opposite linear impulses therefore produce equal clockwise rotations, not opposite rotations.

The restitution law uses the velocities of the contacting endpoints, including the rotational terms. For $A$ that velocity isand for $B$ it is $u_B=-V+J/m$. The approach speed before impact is $2V$. The coefficient of restitution $e$ therefore givesSubstituting into the centre and angular velocities yields the endpoint collision of two freely rotating equal rods:For the first, perfectly elastic case, $e=1$, soAll initial translational energy has become rotational energy. Indeed the total initial kinetic energy is $2m{V}^2$, while the final energy for general $e$ isThe loss is $m{V}^2(1-e^2)$, zero for an elastic collision. Conservation of total angular momentum about the origin provides another check: initially it is $-4m\ell V$; after collision the centre-motion contribution is $-2m\ell V(1-e)$ and the spins contribute $-2m\ell V(1+e)$, with the same total. The initial distance $d$ determines when the collision occurs but does not enter the impulsive velocities.

Let ${\mathbf{e}}_r,{\mathbf{e}}_{\varphi },{\mathbf{e}}_z$ be the cylindrical unit vectors. The surface has an upward normal vector proportional to ${\mathbf{e}}_z-h^{\prime }(r){\mathbf{e}}_r$. If $N_z$ is the vertical component of the normal force, its radial component is $-h^{\prime }(r)N_z$. In the stated approximation, vertical acceleration and the vertical driving-force component are neglected, so vertical balance gives $N_z\simeq Mg$. The horizontal contact force is consequently $-Mg{h}^{\prime }(r){\mathbf{e}}_r$. The projected velocity and its speed areThe driving force is parallel to this velocity, with components $F\dot{r}/u$ and $Fr\dot{\varphi }/u$. Use the acceleration in polar coordinates and Newton's second law to obtainThese equations apply where $u\ne 0$; at rest the direction of an exactly velocity-aligned drive is not determined.

For a prescribed path, write $r^{\prime }=dr/d\varphi$, $r^{\prime \prime }=d^{2}r/d{\varphi }^2$. The chain rule gives $\dot{r}=r^{\prime }\dot{\varphi }$ and $\ddot{r}=r^{\prime \prime }{\dot{\varphi }}^2+r^{\prime }\ddot{\varphi }$. Subtract $r^{\prime }/r$ times the azimuthal equation from the radial equation. The driving force and $\ddot{\varphi }$ both cancel:Thus the constraint for tangentially driven motion on an axisymmetric surface isThe denominator must give a nonnegative squared speed, and the calculation uses $r>0$. At the polar origin a limiting Cartesian description is appropriate.

For the paraboloid and Archimedean spiral, putThen, for $\varphi >0$,The branch tending to $\varphi =\infty$ has positive angular velocity, henceSince $u=ϵ\dot{\varphi }\sqrt{1+{\varphi }^2}$, solve the azimuthal equation for the required force:This is positive for $\varphi >0$, consistent with a forward drive. Taking the limit gives

These are the large-time limits of the printed projected equations. Their mechanical approximation has a precise range limitation: on the exact surface, $z=h(r)$ gives $\dot{z}=(2r/\ell )\dot{r}$, which along this solution grows like $2{ϵ}^2\alpha \varphi /\ell$. At fixed positive $ϵ$, it is not small as $\varphi \to \infty$. Thus the requested limits are formal limits of that reduced model; neglect of vertical motion is not a uniform approximation to the full three-dimensional motion all the way to infinity.

On one poloidal flux surface, the field-line angular velocity $\omega (\psi )$ is constant. In a frame rotating at that rate the relative velocity is $\mathbf{v}=\mathbf{u}-R\omega {\mathbf{e}}_{\varphi }=k\mathbf{B}/\rho$, parallel to the magnetic field. The Lorentz force is perpendicular to this motion, and the Coriolis force also does no work. Centrifugal acceleration comes from the effective potential $-R^2{\omega }^2/2$. Since entropy is constant along the surface, pressure work integrates to specific enthalpy $w$, with $dw=dp/\rho$ along the flow.

Therefore kinetic energy relative to the rotating poloidal flux surface, enthalpy and effective gravitational-plus-centrifugal potential have a constant sum:This is a corotating energy integral, not the laboratory energy alone: Maxwell stress tensor stresses can transfer energy and angular momentum in the laboratory frame. In fact the expression equals $|\mathbf{u}{|}^2/2+w+\Phi -\omega R{u}_{\varphi }$, namely the total magnetohydrodynamic Bernoulli invariant minus $\omega \ell$. Differential rotation between surfaces does not invalidate the argument, because the chosen angular velocity is fixed along the particular surface being followed.

Let ${\mathbf{e}}_1^{\prime }(t),{\mathbf{e}}_2^{\prime }(t),{\mathbf{e}}_3^{\prime }(t)$ be an orthonormal basis fixed in the rotating reference frame $S^{\prime }$. A small rotation through $\mathbf{\omega }dt$ changes each basis vector by $\mathbf{\omega }\times {\mathbf{e}}_j^{\prime }dt$, so its derivative in the inertial frame isWrite the arbitrary vector as $\mathbf{a}={\sum }_j{a}_j(t){\mathbf{e}}_j^{\prime }(t)$. Differentiating the components and the moving basis separately givesThis proves the rotating-frame derivative formula, including when the angular velocity varies with time.

Let $\Omega$ be the Earth's angular velocity magnitude. Use the local east, north and upward unit vectors ${\mathbf{e}}_E,{\mathbf{e}}_N,{\mathbf{e}}_U$, with ${\mathbf{e}}_E\times {\mathbf{e}}_N={\mathbf{e}}_U$. At latitude $\lambda$, the Earth's angular velocity and the train's ground-relative velocity areThus the east component of the Coriolis force isFor a north–south track, the train has no eastward acceleration relative to Earth. Its path curvature lies in the local north–vertical plane. The centrifugal acceleration and Newtonian gravity also lie in that plane, and the Earth's constant angular velocity gives no Euler acceleration. Hence the sideways force from the track must cancel the eastward Coriolis force:Its magnitude is $2m\Omega V\sin \lambda$, and its direction is west in the Northern hemisphere. The eastward tendency is the apparent Coriolis force; the requested track force has the opposite direction.

Let $\rho =3m/(4\pi R_0^3)$ be the uniform mass density. In spherical coordinates $(r,\vartheta ,\varphi )$ with the chosen diameter as polar axis, the squared perpendicular distance to that axis is $r^2{\sin }^2\vartheta$. The moment of inertia is thereforeThis derives the moment of inertia of a uniform solid sphere about any central axis by spherical symmetry.

Put $a=R_1-R_0$. The center of mass follows the circle of radius $a$, with position ${\mathbf{r}}_C=a(\sin \theta ,-\cos \theta )$. Let ${\mathbf{e}}_r=(\sin \theta ,-\cos \theta )$ and ${\mathbf{e}}_{\theta }=(\cos \theta ,\sin \theta )$. Its velocity is $a\dot{\theta }{\mathbf{e}}_{\theta }$, and the contact point is displaced from the center of mass by $R_0{\mathbf{e}}_r$. With positive spin angular velocity ${\Omega }_s$ counterclockwise, its contact-point velocity isThe cylinder is fixed, so rolling without slipping requires this velocity to vanish. Consequently ${\Omega }_s=-a\dot{\theta }/R_0$. If instead the spin angle $\psi$ is positive clockwise, opposite to increasing $\theta$, then the printed positive-coefficient convention isThe spin and orbital rotation have opposite directions when both are measured about the same oriented axis; the angular speed is $a|\dot{\theta }|/R_0$. This specifies the sign convention in the printed expression.

The instantaneous contact point is at rest, so the normal reaction and static friction do no work. Conservation of energy equates the loss of gravitational potential energy from release to the total kinetic energy:On the descent from $0<\alpha <\pi /2$, $\theta$ decreases, soIntegrating $dt=-d\theta /|\dot{\theta }|$ from release to the bottom givesThe integral is finite: at the release point its denominator is asymptotic to $\sqrt{\sin \alpha (\alpha -\theta )}$. Contact is maintained, since the inward radial equation of motion gives the positive normal reaction $N=m(g\cos \theta +a{\dot{\theta }}^2)$ throughout this range.

For frictionless sliding, the normal reaction passes through the sphere's centre and produces no torque; Newtonian gravity also exerts no central torque. With initial zero spin, the sphere remains nonrotating. All the lost gravitational potential energy becomes translational kinetic energy, soA hollow spherical shell of the same mass and radius places its material farther from the centre, giving a larger moment of inertia. Under rolling without slipping, a given centre speed therefore requires more rotational kinetic energy; the same gravitational drop yields a smaller speed. Replacing the solid sphere by a hollow shell increases $T_R$ and leaves $T_S$ unchanged. The sliding case remains nonrotating and has the same center of mass path and gravitational drop. This is the general comparison for rolling inside a fixed circular cylinder.

For an axisymmetric magnetic field, the solenoidal condition becomes ${\partial }_R(R{B}_R)+{\partial }_z(R{B}_z)=0$. Locally introduce a poloidal magnetic flux function $\Psi$ byThe divergence condition is exactly the integrability condition for these two derivatives. The additive constant in $\Psi$ fixes the reference flux. For a field regular on the axis choose $\Psi (0,z,t)=0$. Then the magnetic flux through a horizontal disk of radius $R$ is $2\pi \Psi (R,z,t)$, and the flux between two such surfaces is $2\pi \Delta \Psi$.

Since ${\mathbf{B}}_p\cdot \nabla \Psi =0$ and ${\partial }_{\varphi }\Psi =0$, the level surfaces of $\Psi$ contain the complete magnetic field, including its toroidal magnetic field component. Thus regular levels are poloidal flux surfaces. Their meridional contours trace the projected field lines. The representation is local on regular regions; disconnected flux surfaces with the same label need not share additional physical data.

The azimuthal component of $\mathbf{u}\times \mathbf{B}$ is $u_z{B}_R-u_R{B}_z=-{\mathbf{u}}_p\cdot \nabla \Psi /R$. The ideal magnetohydrodynamic induction equation, equivalently Faraday's law with $\mathbf{E}=-\mathbf{u}\times \mathbf{B}$, gives ${\Psi }_t=R(\mathbf{u}\times \mathbf{B}{)}_{\varphi }$ up to a time-dependent reference constant. Fixing that reference gives the material advection of an axisymmetric magnetic flux function:Axisymmetry removes the azimuthal contribution to the material derivative. This is magnetic flux freezing expressed using one scalar flux label.

The azimuthal component itself is generally not an advected scalar. Including the cylindrical basis-vector derivatives in the induction equation givesUsing mass conservation, $D\rho /Dt=-\rho \nabla \cdot \mathbf{u}$, and $DR/Dt=u_R$, this becomes the toroidal magnetic-field winding equation:Thus $B_{\varphi }/(\rho R)$ is conserved following the flow if the angular velocity is constant along the poloidal magnetic field, including the case of no rotation. Otherwise differential rotation winds poloidal field into toroidal field.

There is also an explicit flux-conservation form,Integrating this over a meridional region converts its change of toroidal flux to boundary terms. Hence such a flux is conserved when the indicated boundary transport vanishes. More generally magnetic flux freezing conserves flux through every material surface, but a meridional coordinate surface need not remain material when the fluid rotates. Toroidal flux conservation therefore does not imply that $B_{\varphi }$ itself is materially constant.

Matter corotating with the footpoint has fixed angular velocity ${\Omega }_0=(GM/R_0^3{)}^{1/2}$. Its effective potential in that rotating frame is the sum of Newtonian gravitational potential and centrifugal potential,Along an outward-inclined straight magnetic field line, write $R=R_0+s\sin i$ and $z=s\cos i$, where $s$ is distance from the footpoint. The exact potential along it isIts first derivative at $s=0$ is zero by the Keplerian rotation balance. At the footpoint the meridional Hessian is $\mathrm{diag}(-3{\Omega }_0^2,{\Omega }_0^2)$ with zero mixed derivative. HenceWhen $0\le i<30^{\circ }$, the potential initially rises and a cold parcel must overcome a barrier. When $i>30^{\circ }$, its quadratic curvature is negative, so the footpoint is a local maximum along the field and a small outward displacement is accelerated further outward:This is the thirty-degree magnetocentrifugal launching criterion. It describes the lack of a local cold-launch barrier, not a nonzero force on a parcel exactly at rest at $s=0$. At exactly $30^{\circ }$ the quadratic term vanishes; for the specified straight line the next term is $-7{\Omega }_0^2{s}^3/(16R_0)$, as in marginal straight-line launch at thirty degrees. Global wind escape additionally depends on conditions farther along the line.

For the moment of inertia of a uniform solid sphere, write the mass density as $\rho =3m/(4\pi a^3)$. In spherical coordinates about the chosen axis, the squared perpendicular distance is $R^2{\sin }^2\vartheta$. The volume element is $R^2\sin \vartheta dRd\vartheta d\phi$, so

Take $0<\alpha <\pi /2$ and $\ell >0$, with a fixed plane. The normal force has magnitude $N=mg\cos \alpha$ and is perpendicular to the plane. On the perfectly smooth plane there is no friction. Both gravity and the normal force have zero torque about the marble's centre, so a marble released from rest does not rotate. The component of Newton's second law down the plane is $m{A}_1=mg\sin \alpha$, henceThe normal force does no work because the velocity is tangent to the plane. Gravity is conservative, so mechanical energy, the sum of translational kinetic energy and gravitational potential energy, is conserved.

For rolling without slipping, let the static friction force have magnitude $f$, pointing up the plane. It supplies the torque that spins the marble while reducing its translational acceleration. If $\Omega$ is the angular velocity and $A_2$ the acceleration down the plane, the rolling constraint is $a\Omega =\dot{s}$, hence $a\dot{\Omega }=A_2$. The translation and rotation equations areThus $f=I{A}_2/a^2$ andThese are the equations for rolling acceleration with rotational inertia; the plane must be rough enough to supply this static friction.

The point of contact is instantaneously at rest relative to the fixed plane, so static friction does no total work on the rolling marble. Equivalently, its translational power is $-f\dot{s}$ and its rotational power is $fa\Omega =f\dot{s}$, which cancel. The normal force also does no work. Consequently mechanical energy is conserved here too, now with rotational kinetic energy included:where $H$ is the centre's height. No energy loss is implied by the presence of ideal static friction. Constant acceleration from rest gives

For the hollow marble, put $I=\lambda m{a}^2$ in the same equations. The smooth-plane time is unchanged, while the rolling acceleration becomes $g\sin \alpha /(1+\lambda )$. ThereforeThis again assumes rolling without slipping and enough static friction; the ratio depends on the mass distribution through its moment of inertia.

The magnetorotational instability extracts energy from differential rotation through magnetic tension. It can destabilize a disk whose specific angular momentum increases outward, even though such a disk satisfies Rayleigh's circulation criterion. The distinction is that an unmagnetized displaced parcel approximately conserves its own angular momentum, whereas a field line transfers angular momentum between parcels. If angular velocity decreases outward, an outward-displaced parcel lags its inner partner. Magnetic tension transfers angular momentum to the outer parcel and removes it from the inner one, making their radial separation increase. A sufficiently stiff magnetic connection suppresses the separation instead. The instability therefore requires a finite range of field-line-bending strengths.

Make this mechanism quantitative in the local shearing sheet of a cylindrical rotation profile $\Omega (r)$. Put $q=-d\log \Omega /d\log r$, and take $0<q<2$ so the unmagnetized flow is stable. Its radial epicyclic frequency is ${\kappa }^2=2(2-q){\Omega }^2$. Let the uniform field be vertical, $B_z{\mathbf{e}}_z$, with constant mass density, and use an axisymmetric horizontal disturbance proportional to $e^{st+ikz}$. Write $\mathbf{h}=\mathbf{b}/\sqrt{{\mu }_0\rho }$ and ${\omega }_A=k{B}_z/\sqrt{{\mu }_0\rho }$. The linearized ideal magnetohydrodynamics equations areThe first pair contains Coriolis acceleration and the epicyclic response; the last equation is the shear-winding of a radial field perturbation into an azimuthal one. Omitting that winding term would remove the driving mechanism.

Eliminating $h_r,h_{\varphi }$ gives $(s^2+{\omega }_A^2)u_r=2\Omega s{u}_{\varphi }$ and $s(s^2+{\omega }_A^2)u_{\varphi }+\Omega [(2-q)s^2-q{\omega }_A^2]u_r=0$. Their determinant is the ideal magnetorotational dispersion relationIts discriminant as a quadratic in $s^2$ is ${\kappa }^4+16{\Omega }^2{\omega }_A^2>0$. Since $2{\omega }_A^2+{\kappa }^2>0$, a positive $s^2$ exists precisely when its constant term is negative:Thus angular velocity, rather than specific angular momentum, must decrease outward. A Keplerian disk has $q=3/2$, ${\kappa }^2={\Omega }^2$ and is hydrodynamically stable, yet magnetic modes with $0<k^2{v}_A^2<3{\Omega }^2$ grow.

The growing root is $s^2=-{\omega }_A^2-{\kappa }^2/2+\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{{\kappa }^4+16{\Omega }^2{\omega }_A^2}$. Differentiation with respect to ${\omega }_A^2$ gives the maximum growth rate of ideal magnetorotational instability:For Keplerian shear these are $3\Omega /4$ and $15{\Omega }^2/16$. The ideal maximum is set by shear; reducing field strength reduces the fastest wavelength instead of reducing this maximum growth rate. This is why the exactly zero-field problem differs from a sequence of weak-field problems with progressively larger wave number. At fixed wave number, growth does tend to zero as the field vanishes. The wavelength must fit the actual disk, and diffusion eventually matters at sufficiently short scales.

The instability has the required angular-momentum-transfer sign. In a growing mode, $u_{\varphi }/u_r=(s^2+{\omega }_A^2)/(2\Omega s)>0$. At the fastest mode this ratio is one, while induction gives $h_{\varphi }=-h_r$ after allowing for their common Fourier phase. Thus the averaged Reynolds stress minus Maxwell stress tensor, $\rho ⟨u_r{u}_{\varphi }-h_r{h}_{\varphi }⟩$, is positive: angular momentum moves outward. Its product with $q\Omega$ is the energy supplied by the background shear. These local mechanisms and coefficient conventions are also checked in the primary MRI stability calculation.

More general fields require separating field-line bending from field gradients and curvature. At leading local order, for a stationary compatible field in an incompressible flow with axisymmetric wavevector $(k_r,0,k_z)$, the bending frequency isPressure elimination projects the radial force by $f=k_z^2/k^2$. The radial momentum equation becomes $s{u}_r-2f\Omega u_{\varphi }=i{\omega }_A{h}_r$; the azimuthal and induction equations retain the form above. Eliminating the amplitudes gives the oblique axisymmetric magnetorotational dispersion relationHere $k_z\ne 0$. The unstable range is $0<{\omega }_A^2<-fd{\Omega }^2/d\log r$. The poloidal magnetic field therefore determines whether an axisymmetric perturbation bends a field line. A locally uniform toroidal magnetic field does not enter $\mathbf{k}\cdot \mathbf{B}$ for axisymmetry, and can contribute magnetic pressure that is projected out of this incompressible leading-order problem. Thus a toroidal component does not suppress the weak-field MRI merely by being present. Conversely a purely toroidal field has no ordinary axisymmetric local bending MRI in this approximation. This does not imply that every globally curved toroidal equilibrium is stable.

A steady general poloidal magnetic field must also be compatible with the equilibrium rotation. The azimuthal ideal magnetohydrodynamic induction equation contains ${\partial }_t{B}_{\varphi }=r{\mathbf{B}}_p\cdot \nabla \Omega$. A stationary axisymmetric equilibrium with no meridional flow consequently requires ${\mathbf{B}}_p\cdot \nabla \Omega =0$, Ferraro's law of isorotation. A radial field crossing cylindrical differential-rotation surfaces would otherwise wind secularly; it cannot simply be substituted into a stationary normal-mode calculation. Boundary conditions and the along-field eigenvalue problem replace a freely chosen local $k$ in nonuniform or bounded equilibria. Strong enough field-line tension can then stabilize all admissible wavelengths.

An explicit axisymmetric effect of nonuniform field strength and curvature is obtained with a purely toroidal field $B_{\varphi }(r){\mathbf{e}}_{\varphi }$, constant mass density and cylindrical rotation. A radial fluid displacement changes the field byThis follows directly from $\mathbf{b}=\nabla \times (\mathbf{\xi }\times \mathbf{B})$ and incompressibility. Its radial curvature force, after absorbing the magnetic-pressure perturbation, is $-2B_{\varphi }{b}_{\varphi }/({\mu }_0\rho r)$. The axisymmetric azimuthal momentum equation is $s{u}_{\varphi }+(2\Omega +r{\Omega }^{\prime })u_r=0$. Combining it with the radial force and then projecting out pressure givesThis is the local Michael criterion for axisymmetric toroidal-field interchange. The new term can either stabilize or destabilize: for $B_{\varphi }\propto r^p$, $\mathcal{D}={\kappa }^2+2(1-p)v_{A\varphi }^2/r^2$. A current-free $B_{\varphi }\propto r^{-1}$ is stabilizing; $B_{\varphi }\propto r$ leaves this axisymmetric interchange coefficient unchanged; a sufficiently steep increase with $p>1$ can destabilize even a centrifugally stable rotation law. That last instability can persist without differential rotation, so its energy source is the magnetic-current equilibrium rather than the ordinary MRI. Nonaxisymmetric current-driven modes are outside the requested essay scope.

For mixed poloidal and toroidal fields, the full induction perturbation contains $(\mathbf{B}\cdot \nabla )\mathbf{\xi }-(\mathbf{\xi }\cdot \nabla )\mathbf{B}-\mathbf{B}\nabla \cdot \mathbf{\xi }$, and the linear Lorentz force contains both $(\nabla \times \mathbf{b})\times \mathbf{B}$ and $(\nabla \times \mathbf{B})\times \mathbf{b}$. These terms explain why gradients and curvature cannot be replaced everywhere by a scalar $k^2{v}_A^2$: they can draw on equilibrium-current energy and couple the radial and vertical motions. Compressibility introduces additional magnetic pressure and magnetosonic responses; a strong toroidal field can alter the dispersion even though it disappeared from the leading incompressible weak-field result.

Finally, a vertically or radially stratified general field also supports part of the equilibrium weight through magnetic pressure. A displaced flux tube carries its frozen-in mass-to-flux relation, so its mass density at the surrounding total pressure can differ from its new environment. This introduces magnetic buoyancy instability and competition with ordinary buoyancy. Axisymmetric interchange displacements can access this energy without an azimuthal wave number, while poloidal tension resists variation along the field. Growth that survives when $d\Omega /dr=0$ must not be attributed to shear-driven MRI. The general-field stability problem therefore combines shear, field-line tension, current/curvature forces, compressibility, buoyancy and boundary constraints; the uniform-field result isolates the basic angular-momentum feedback mechanism.

Apply the rotating-frame derivative formula first to $r$, then to $v^{\prime }=[dr/dt{]}_{S^{\prime }}$. Since the angular velocity is constant in either frame,The two apparent forces in the rotating equation are the Coriolis force and the centrifugal acceleration multiplied by mass. ThusSet ${\varphi }_{\mathrm{eff}}=\varphi -\frac{m}{2}|\omega \times r{|}^2$. The supplied gradient identity gives $\nabla {\varphi }_{\mathrm{eff}}=\nabla \varphi +m\omega \times (\omega \times r)$. Taking the scalar product with $v^{\prime }$ removes $G$, since it is orthogonal to $v^{\prime }$, and removes the Coriolis force. Therefore the energy balance in a uniformly rotating frame isThe displayed quantity is conserved when the potential is stationary in the rotating coordinates. This includes a static inertial potential invariant under rotations about the chosen axis, such as vertical gravity in part (b). If the word conservative only means a time-independent inertial potential, that extra rotational invariance is needed; a conservative force alone does not imply the claimed conservation.

For an explicit counterexample to that unrestricted interpretation, take unit mass, an inertial force $F=e_x$, $\varphi =-x$, no $G$, rotation $\omega =\omega e_z$, and inertial trajectory $r(t)=(t^2/2,1,0)$ with initial velocity zero. It satisfies Newton's second law. Substituting $v^{\prime }=\dot{r}-\omega \times r$ into the proposed energy gives $E=\omega t$, which is not constant for nonzero rotation. The qualified conservation law above is the one used for the hoop.

Measure a signed angle $\theta$ from the upward radius $A\to O$ in the direction of falling. With $I_A=3m{a}^2/2$, gravitational torque givesThere is an idealization in the release condition: exactly upright and exactly at rest is an unstable equilibrium, so the exact ideal solution stays there. Uniqueness of this smooth equation with $\theta (0)=\dot{\theta }(0)=0$ prevents spontaneous departure. The usual falling calculation means an infinitesimal disturbance, with its energy tending to that of the upright rest state. For that limiting separatrix motion, conservation of mechanical energy givesOn the branch with increasing angle, $\dot{\theta }=\sqrt{8g/(3a)}\sin (\theta /2)$ for $0<\theta <2\pi$; the opposite branch has the opposite angular velocity. The nontrivial limiting motion approaches the upright position only as $t\to -\infty$, because $dt/d\theta$ has a logarithmically divergent integral near zero.

Let $e_r$ point from $A$ toward $O$, and $e_{\theta }$ in the direction of increasing angle, so $e_r=\sin \theta e_x+\cos \theta e_z$ and $e_{\theta }=\cos \theta e_x-\sin \theta e_z$. The centre of mass acceleration on the limiting falling branch isGravity has components $-mg\cos \theta e_r+mg\sin \theta e_{\theta }$. Applying Newton's second law to the whole disc givesThe signed component parallel to the radius, positive from $A$ toward $O$, is the required $mg(7\cos \theta -4)/3$. This same radial formula is consistent at the exact stationary upright state, where $\theta =0$, $a_O=0$, and $R=mg{e}_z$; nonzero falling angles require the limiting-release interpretation just stated.

Let $M=M_1+M_2$, and let $\mu =M_1{M}_2/M$ be the reduced mass. The stellar distances from the center of mass are $a_1=a{M}_2/M$ and $a_2=a{M}_1/M$. For a circular Kepler orbit, ${\Omega }^2=GM/a^3$, so summing the two orbital contributions gives the circular-binary orbital angular momentumThe separation $a$ is inside the square root. This also has the required dimensions of angular momentum.

For the homologous rotating collapse, label a fluid element by $s=r/R$ and its polar angle $\theta$. Its enclosed mass $m(s)$ is constant during stellar homology, as are the dimensionless density profile and the inertia coefficient $\alpha$. Conservation of angular momentum and solid-body rotation giveThe magnitude of the centrifugal acceleration is ${\Omega }^{2}r\sin \theta$, while the Newtonian gravitational field has magnitude $Gm(s)/r^2$. ThereforeUsing only the radial component of centrifugal force replaces $\sin \theta$ by ${\sin }^2\theta$ and leaves the scaling unchanged. The centrifugal force vanishes on the rotation axis; the central point is understood through the limiting field rather than a ratio of two zero forces.

At the equator of the cloud, critical rotation of a spherical cloud means ${\Omega }_c^2{R}_c=GM/R_c^2$, where $R_c=R_{\mathrm{crit}}$. ConsequentlyImmediately after the first fission, each daughter has mass $M/2$ and radius $a/2$ because the spheres touch. Their orbital moment of inertia is $M{a}^2/4$, while their combined spin moment of inertia is $\alpha M{a}^2/4$. With a common spin and orbital frequency ${\Omega }_f=\sqrt{GM/a^3}$, the synchronous fission model for binary formation givesThe common frequency can change during fission; corotation requires equal instantaneous frequencies, not an unchanged frequency from before the rearrangement. Equating the two values of $J$ yieldsFor a nonzero positive inertia coefficient, the necessary and sufficient condition in this algebraic model for $a<R_c$ isFor example, a moment of inertia of a uniform solid sphere has $\alpha =2/5$ and gives $a/R_c=64/49>1$; it fails the required compact-fission condition. A sufficiently centrally concentrated cloud can have smaller $\alpha$.

For the next collapse, neglect exchange of spin with the unchanged outer orbit, so each daughter's spin angular momentum is separately conserved. Immediately after the first fission that spin isFor a daughter of mass $m=M/2$ to reach critical rotation of a spherical cloud at radius $R_{c,d}$, the same relation gives $S_d=\alpha m\sqrt{Gm{R}_{c,d}}$. HenceEquivalently, its centrifugal-to-gravity ratio starts at $1/4$ when its radius is $a/2$ and reaches one after contraction by a factor four. Applying the same fission rule to this daughter produces an inner pair with separationCorotation at this second fission is local to each newly formed inner pair; it is not a single common frequency for the entire four-star hierarchy.

This spin assumption matters. If tidal locking instead kept each shrinking daughter synchronized to the fixed outer orbital period throughout the intervening collapse, its angular velocity would remain fixed. Its centrifugal-to-gravity ratio would then scale as $R_d^3$ and decrease, so it would never reach the proposed second fission. This is a counterexample to extending the corotation assumption through the whole contraction. The printed ratio describes the separately spin-conserving interpretation of the repeated fission hierarchy.

The model can generate a compact hierarchy algebraically, but is not a general physical account of multiple-star formation. In the allowed range $\alpha <1/3$, one has $a^{\prime }/a<1/8$, suggesting well-separated inner and outer scales. However, rapidly rotating gas deforms, touching daughters are tidally distorted, and pressure, gas flows, dissipation and spin-orbit torques cannot generally be ignored. The assumed identical profiles, equal mass splits, instantaneous corotation and later torque-free contractions are restrictive. Star formation can involve gravitational fragmentation and redistribution of angular momentum; the toy budget neither proves that fission occurs nor predicts the population of real multiple systems.

For any vector $\mathbf{a}$, differentiating its components and the rotating basis gives the rotating-frame derivative formulaApply it twice to the position $\mathbf{x}$, with constant angular velocity $\mathbf{\omega }$. The inertial acceleration iswhere dots denote rotating-frame derivatives. Newton's second law therefore becomesThe last terms are the Coriolis force and the force corresponding to centrifugal acceleration.