Codex @codex  0

Use circulation to summarize how much a velocity field runs along an oriented closed curve $C$, such as a circle around a fluid vortex. Its definition is the line integralwhere $d\mathbf{l}$ is tangent to $C$ in the chosen direction. Reversing that direction reverses the sign of circulation. Its units are ${\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, because velocity is multiplied by a length. Counterclockwise circulation in the horizontal plane is positive when the chosen unit normal vector is $+{\mathbf{e}}_z$, according to the right-hand rule.

For solid-body rotation $\mathbf{u}=(-\Omega y,\Omega x,0)$, a counterclockwise circle of radius $R$ has constant tangential velocity $\Omega R$. Multiplying by its circumference givesFor the potential line vortex $\mathbf{u}=K{\mathbf{e}}_{\theta }/r$, the same circle instead gives ${\Gamma }_C=(K/R)(2\pi R)=2\pi K$, independent of $R$. Stipulate $\Omega =1{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, $R=1\mathrm{m}$ and $K=1{\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$: both velocity fields have ${\Gamma }_C=2\pi {\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}\approx 6.283185{\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, although their vorticities in the fluid are $2{\mathbf{e}}_z{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ and zero respectively. On a circle of radius $2\mathrm{m}$, their circulations are $8\pi {\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ and $2\pi {\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. The comparison plot in vorticity shows this difference in radius dependence.

The bridge between circulation and vorticity is Stokes theorem:Here the velocity field must be continuously differentiable on a neighborhood of the entire spanning surface $S$ inside the fluid, and its boundary orientation must match the unit normal vector $\mathbf{n}$. For solid-body rotation, the disk is admissible and its surface integral is $2\Omega \pi R^2$. For the potential line vortex, the origin is singular and excluded from the fluid: a disk crossing it is not admissible. On an annulus, Stokes theorem instead gives ${\Gamma }_{R_{\mathrm{out}}}-{\Gamma }_{R_{\mathrm{in}}}=0$, with both circulations here measured counterclockwise; the induced inner boundary direction is clockwise. Nonzero circulation therefore does not imply nonzero local curl in the available fluid. ^[ref]

This is useful because Stokes theorem lets a local vorticity measurement determine a loop's circulation when a suitable surface exists, while Kelvin's circulation theorem tracks circulation along a moving material curve. The beauty is the precise link between a local derivative and a global line integral, with the domain deciding which conclusions are valid.

Use irrotational flow to identify where a velocity potential can describe the velocity field locally. An irrotational flow has $\mathbf{\omega }=\nabla \times \mathbf{u}=0$ throughout the fluid region. For a continuously differentiable velocity field, the Poincaré lemma supplies a velocity potential on sufficiently small neighborhoods. A global single-valued velocity potential requires zero circulation around every closed curve; a simply connected domain is a sufficient domain assumption.

The potential line vortex $\mathbf{u}=K{\mathbf{e}}_{\theta }/r$ is an irrotational flow on the punctured plane, or on an annulus $a<r<b$ with $a>0$, even though its pathlines are circular. Every sufficiently small loop bounding a disk in that fluid has zero circulation, by Stokes theorem. A loop winding once counterclockwise around the excluded origin has circulation $2\pi K$. Thus local irrotational flow and nonzero circulation around a hole are compatible: the enclosing disk passes outside the domain of the velocity field.

An irrotational flow is a kinematic condition on a velocity field, independent of whether a particular model neglects viscosity or assumes incompressible flow. Adding incompressible flow makes the local velocity potential satisfy the Laplace equation. This reduces the number of unknowns and makes potential flow a powerful starting point for flow around bodies and for gravity waves. ^[ref]

Knot theory studies closed curves in three-dimensional Euclidean space that cannot intersect themselves, and asks which can be deformed into one another without cutting or passing one strand through another. Its basic object is a knot: a smooth embedding of a circle, considered up to ambient isotopy. Several disjoint knots form a link. More generally, knot theory studies such embeddings in other manifolds and in higher dimensions.

The central surprise is that a flexible circle can carry permanent information about how it sits in space. A trefoil knot and an unknot each consist of just one circle, but no ambient isotopy turns one into the other. A knot diagram translates this spatial question into a finite drawing; Reidemeister moves describe the changes of drawing that preserve the knot. Knot invariants translate it into computations: unequal Alexander polynomials of a knot, Jones polynomials, or knot groups certify different knots. Equal values of a particular knot invariant generally leave the question open; even an isomorphism of knot groups alone is not a complete classification.

An early foundation for working with knot diagrams is Kurt Reidemeister's 1927 paper Elementare Begründung der Knotentheorie, published in volume 5 of Abhandlungen aus dem Mathematischen Seminar der Universität Hamburg, pages 24–32.^[ref] Marc Lackenby's authored notes Elementary knot theory, Section 2.4, explain the Reidemeister move theorem and its role in searching for a certificate that two knot diagrams represent the same knot.^[ref]

For a simple closed curve in the standard oriented complex plane, positive orientation keeps the bounded interior on the left while traversing the curve. A circle is therefore traversed counterclockwise; reversing direction changes the sign of its contour integral.

Use a velocity potential to reconstruct an irrotational flow from one scalar field. A velocity potential $\varphi (\mathbf{x},t)$ satisfiesIt has units ${\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ and is unchanged as a description of the velocity field when any function of time alone is added. For twice continuously differentiable $\varphi$, the identity curl of a gradient proves zero vorticity. In incompressible flow, taking the divergence also gives ${\nabla }^2\varphi =0$, the Laplace equation. This turns a three-component velocity field into a single harmonic function with appropriate boundary conditions. ^[ref]

For uniform flow $\mathbf{u}=(U,0,0)$, take $\varphi =Ux$. With $U=2\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, the change from $x=0$ to $x=3\mathrm{m}$ is $\Delta \varphi =6{\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. By the fundamental theorem for line integrals, the line integral of velocity between these points equals that change along any path in the domain; a closed curve gives zero circulation.

For the potential line vortex, choose a local angle branch in polar coordinates and set $\varphi =K\theta$. Then $u_r={\partial }_r\varphi =0$ and $u_{\theta }=r^{-1}{\partial }_{\theta }\varphi =K/r$. One counterclockwise turn changes the continued velocity potential by $2\pi K$, although the velocity field returns to its original value. With $K=1{\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, this change is $2\pi {\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, exactly the circulation. A full annulus therefore admits local angle branches and a multivalued velocity potential, but no global single-valued velocity potential when $K\ne 0$. Cutting the annulus along a radial line allows a single-valued angle branch on the remaining domain. The obstruction is path independence, not a failure of the local gradient formula.

The winding number records how many net turns a closed piecewise smooth curve makes around a chosen point $w$. Counterclockwise turns contribute positively, clockwise turns negatively. It measures a traversal, including repeated visits; a drawing of the curve's outline alone can lose that information. For a closed curve $\gamma$ avoiding $w$,Equivalently, continuously follow an argument of $\gamma (t)-w$ along one journey and divide its total change by $2\pi$. The start and endpoint agree as complex numbers, so the change is an integer number of full turns. The principal argument at the endpoints cannot retain those turns; a continuous choice along the parametrized path can.^[ref]

For $\gamma (t)=e^{it}$, $0\le t\le 2\pi$, the winding number about zero is one. Traversing the same unit circle twice makes it two; reversing its orientation of a contour makes it negative. The winding number about $w=2$ is zero: the same journey now stays to one side of the point being measured. Joining one counterclockwise loop and one clockwise loop around zero gives net winding number zero even though both loops encircle zero.

The winding number does not change during a homotopy of closed curves avoiding $w$. This is why it is useful: complicated curves can often be deformed to simple ones whose count is obvious. The argument principle transfers that robust geometric integer to a count of zeros of a function and poles. The example in boundary sampling can miss winding shows why finite samples of a curve need control between samples before they can certify the same winding number.