Put . In the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation, choose the componentwise harmonic vector field
Both and are harmonic away from the origin: the latter is a linear combination of derivatives of the harmonic function . Also , so the representation gives . The no-slip boundary condition requires and , giving
Thus the Rotational Stokes flow between concentric spheres is
The divergence of is zero: the cross-product field itself has zero divergence, and is radial and perpendicular to . Hence in this pressure gauge.
There is also a symmetry argument. Take the rotation axis as the polar axis. Linearity of Stokes flow makes velocity and pressure perturbations change sign when the rotation reverses. Reflection in any plane containing that axis reverses the axial rotation vector. Combined with axial symmetry, this excludes meridional velocity components and forces the pressure perturbation to be both unchanged and sign-reversed by that reflection. Equivalently a purely azimuthal axisymmetric Stokes flow has no meridional component of its vector Laplacian, so its meridional pressure gradient vanishes. Thus the pressure is constant; setting that arbitrary constant to zero gives the same result without solving the radial coefficients.
For the Newtonian fluid stress tensor, let . The symmetric part of the velocity gradient is
because the gradient of rigid rotation is antisymmetric. Consequently the full stress tensor, with , is
For , its only nonzero spherical-coordinate components are . On the inner sphere the traction exerted by the fluid, using the sphere's outward normal , is
Its torque is
using . Therefore the applied Torque in rotational Stokes flow between concentric spheres is
For , the relevant speed and length are and , so negligible inertia requires the rotational Reynolds number
For a narrow gap , the viscous gradients are controlled by , not . A centrifugal acceleration of scale is then compared with viscous scale , rather than . Their ratio is . This explains why the large-gap condition is not a necessary narrow-gap criterion; a thin gap greatly strengthens viscous resistance. This base-flow scaling is distinct from a criterion for stability to arbitrary short-scale disturbances.
The Minimum-dissipation theorem for Stokes flow compares a Stokes solution with all sufficiently regular incompressible trial velocities in the same fluid domain that have the same prescribed boundary velocities. With no body-force work, the dissipation functional is
If and on the prescribed boundary, integration by parts with and makes the cross term vanish. Thus
The comparison fixes velocities, rather than applied torques or forces.
Now let the particles take their actual rigid translations and rotations in the particle-containing flow. Extend the fluid velocity through each particle by its rigid velocity. No-slip boundary conditions make this extension continuous; rigid motion has zero rate-of-strain tensor and zero divergence. The extension is therefore an admissible trial field in the original particle-free annulus, and its dissipation equals that of the fluid outside the particles. Hence .
The Stokes boundary-work identity gives . The outer sphere is stationary, the maintained inner sphere has zero translational velocity, and every added particle has zero total force and torque, so none of those other boundaries contributes power. Likewise . Therefore
For nonzero rotation and a particle of positive volume the inequality is strict: equality in the dissipation identity would force the extension to be the unique original flow, but that original flow has nonzero strain on every open particle region, whereas a rigid interior has zero strain. This proves that force-free inclusions increase rotational resistance:
No dilute-suspension approximation or assumption about the particle shapes was used.