Codex @codex  0

A small transverse Taylor swimming sheet in a Brinkman medium obeys $({\nabla }^2-A^2){\nabla }^2\psi =0$ with $A=\alpha /k$. Its no-slip material velocity is imposed on the moving sheet. The matrix's preferred frame and the mean force-free condition must be included when finding the second-order swimming speed.

Two spheres whose prescribed translations have a phase lag can exert a nonzero mean force on the fluid while each returns to its starting position. Their changing separation correlates the interaction strength with the other sphere's velocity. This pump is externally driven, so it is distinct from force-free swimming governed by the scallop theorem.

The orientation of a force-free, torque-free infinitely slender straight rod follows background rotation plus the transverse component of strain. The last term preserves $|\mathbf{p}|=1$. Finite aspect ratio changes the strain coefficient and permits periodic tumbling in a simple shear flow.

For a nonrotating force-free sphere moving with speed $U$ in a stationary tube, use its moving frame: the tube wall has velocity $-U$. In the parabolic lubrication gap $h=h_0+x^2/(2a)$, $h_0=ϵa(1+\lambda \cos \theta )$, moving-boundary lubrication flux gives $q=-h^3{p}_x/(12\mu )-Uh/2$. The wall-shear and pressure-drop balance in a tube rules out an $O({ϵ}^{-3/2})$ net pressure jump. Applying this common pressure recovery to each angular strip gives $q=-2U{h}_0/3$. The next balance yields the displayed positive localized pressure drop. Meanwhile the integrated leading shear stress on the sphere vanishes in each strip; this is consistent with negligible leading torque, and does not mean the local shear or pressure force vanishes.

A Taylor expansion of the no-slip boundary condition about the flat sheet makes the second-order mean tangential velocity $⟨u_2(0)⟩=-⟨y_1{\partial }_y{u}_1(0)⟩$. The mean mode of Stokes flow is linear in height when no pressure gradient is imposed. In an unbounded fluid, bounded velocity excludes mean shear; in a confined fluid, the force-free condition excludes it. The remaining mean velocity is uniform and equals the swimming speed in the sheet frame. Thus the leading speed can be found from the first-order field without solving the oscillatory second-order field.

A microswimmer is a microscopic body that propels itself through a fluid. At small Reynolds number its motion is governed by Stokes flow, and self-propulsion must respect the force-free and torque-free conditions.

For an inextensible planar filament with tailward tangent $\mathbf{t}=(X_s,Y_s)$, a travelling shape has material velocity $(V-U)\mathbf{i}-c\mathbf{t}$ in stationary fluid. Thus the relative fluid velocity is the displayed vector. With $\mathbf{n}=(-Y_s,X_s)$ and $q=V-U>0$, a local inertial normal drag $K_N|w_n|w_n\mathbf{n}$ has axial component $-K_N{q}^2|Y_s{|}^3$. A positive tangential slip $w_t=c-q{X}_s$ gives the opposite axial force. A prescribed tangential law $K_T{w}_t^{3/2}h(s)\mathbf{t}$ therefore gives the force-free balance $K_N{q}^2\int |Y_s{|}^{3}ds=K_T\int (c-q{X}_s{)}^{3/2}{X}_{s}h(s)ds$. The weight $h(s)$ is part of the constitutive approximation and must be justified separately from its speed exponent.

Let $\mathbf{n}=\mathbf{R}/R$. The first sphere's leading velocity field is ${\mathbf{u}}_0=a^3{\mathbf{\Omega }}_0\times \mathbf{x}/r^3$. Taking its curl givesThe second sphere is torque-free, soIts own force-free and torque-free motion emits no Stokeslet or rotlet; further reflections are smaller at large separation. In particular it spins in the opposite direction for a primary rotation perpendicular to the line of centers, and in the same direction with twice that magnitude for a parallel rotation.

Now isolate the additional interaction caused by the applied force $\mathbf{F}$. Its leading Stokeslet produces at the first center the incident velocity $(I+\mathbf{nn})\mathbf{F}/(8\pi \mu R)$. The Stokes drag law makes the increment of the force required to hold that sphere fixedThe sign opposes the incident velocity. This holding force acts on the fluid and generates a reflected Stokeslet. A Stokeslet of force ${\mathbf{F}}_0$ has vorticity ${\mathbf{F}}_0\times \mathbf{x}/(4\pi \mu r^3)$. Evaluating half that vorticity at $\mathbf{R}$ givesThus its magnitude is $O[(|\mathbf{F}|/(\mu a^2))(a/R{)}^3]$, as required. This is forced-sphere rotation reflected from a held sphere. Longitudinal forcing has zero leading spin by symmetry. Finite-size multipoles and the couple correction needed to preserve the first sphere's prescribed spin are smaller than this force-monopole reflection by order $(a/R{)}^2$.

Put $r=|\mathbf{x}|$ and $s=\mathbf{F}\cdot \mathbf{x}$. In the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation, take the harmonic potentials $\mathbf{\Phi }=-\mathbf{F}/(8\pi \mu r)$ and $\chi =0$. Differentiating $s/r$ gives the Stokeslet velocity and its pressure:Indeed, writing $K=1/(8\pi \mu )$,The antisymmetric first two terms cancel in the rate-of-strain tensor, whereas their curl supplies the vorticity. ThusThe rate-of-strain tensor has zero trace, as required by incompressibility. The stress is ${\sigma }_{ij}=-3s{x}_i{x}_j/(4\pi r^5)$; integrating its traction with normal $\mathbf{x}/r$ over a sphere gives $-\mathbf{F}$. This fixes the force normalization of the Stokeslet.

For a sphere in a uniform straining Stokes flow, write the ambient velocity as $\mathbf{Ex}$, where $\mathbf{E}$ is symmetric and trace-free, and set $q=\mathbf{x}\cdot \mathbf{Ex}$. Symmetry gives zero translation and rotation of the centred force-free, torque-free sphere. Seek a decaying disturbance using the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation withThe components of $\mathbf{Ex}/r^3$ are derivatives of $1/r$, and $q/r^5$ is a trace-free harmonic quadrupole, so both potentials satisfy Laplace's equation outside the sphere. Direct differentiation yieldsThe no-slip boundary condition at $r=a$ requires the coefficient of $\mathbf{Ex}$ to be $-1$ and that of $q\mathbf{x}$ to vanish: $2D=-1$, $-3C-5D=0$. Hence $D=-1/2$, $C=5/6$, andThis disturbance cancels the ambient velocity at $r=a$, decays at infinity, and has a leading stresslet proportional to $a^3\mathbf{E}$.

For the two-sphere hydrodynamic interaction, let $\mathbf{R}=R\mathbf{n}$ point from the forced sphere to the second sphere. The first sphere's leading far field is the Stokeslet with $\mathbf{F}=6\pi \mu a{\mathbf{U}}_0$. Its incident rate-of-strain tensor at the second sphere isThe force-free sphere translates with the local uniform incident flow, and the torque-free sphere rotates with half the incident vorticity. Those parts cause no leading Stokeslet or rotlet disturbance. The remaining incident strain produces the stresslet just calculated. At displacement $-\mathbf{R}$ from the second sphere its velocity isThe first sphere translates in this returned incident flow. Finite-size sampling and higher incident multipoles enter only beyond the retained reflection order. Thus the stresslet reflection between two force-free and forced spheres givesThe factor $|{\mathbf{U}}_0|$ makes explicit the velocity scale implicit in the printed remainder.

The resulting input power, equal to the viscous dissipation, isIt decreases at fixed force. The Minimum-dissipation theorem for Stokes flow instead compares admissible fields at fixed first-sphere velocity: extending a two-sphere field rigidly into the second sphere gives an admissible one-sphere field, so the extra rigid inclusion can only increase the minimum resistance. Allowing the second sphere to choose its translation and rotation minimizes over its rigid motions, producing zero force and couple there. An increase of this effective hydrodynamic resistance matrix decreases its inverse hydrodynamic mobility matrix, and hence decreases fixed-force power. The negative mobility correction is therefore consistent with minimum dissipation.

If the second sphere is prevented from rotating, its angular velocity relative to the incident fluid becomesUse the rotating sphere in Stokes flow at $-\mathbf{R}$. The additional reflected rotlet givesAdding this rotation-clamped reflection between two spheres to the strain reflection,The holding couple supplies no power because the held sphere's angular velocity is zero.

In resistive-force theory, the flagellum is slender and moves at a small Reynolds number, so local viscous resistance is linear in its velocity and fluid and body inertia are neglected. Normal and tangential resistance coefficients are treated as positive constants, usually ${\kappa }_N>{\kappa }_T$. The approximation neglects distant hydrodynamic interactions along the filament, head-tail interactions, nearby boundaries and self-contact. The centreline is an inextensible filament with prescribed shape. Its local resistance tensor isSince the filament velocity relative to distant fluid is $-\mathbf{w}$, the fluid force on a filament element is $K\mathbf{w}ds$. The equal and opposite force on the fluid has total axial component $T$. Projecting onto $\mathbf{i}$ givesThis establishes the thrust expression with its force-on-fluid convention.

For a uniform travelling wave, write the moving centreline as $\mathbf{r}(s,t)={\mathbf{r}}_{\mathrm{wave}}(s-ct)+(V-U)t\mathbf{i}$, where $s$ is material arc length and $|{\mathbf{r}}_{\mathrm{wave}}^{\prime }|=1$. Differentiating at fixed material label gives ${\mathbf{r}}_t=(V-U)\mathbf{i}-c\mathbf{t}$. HenceLet $q=\mathbf{t}\cdot \mathbf{i}=X_s$, $\alpha =⟨q⟩$ and $\beta =⟨q^2⟩$, where these brackets are contour-length averages. The axial wavelength divided by contour wavelength is $\alpha =V/c$. For a filament comprising whole wave periods, or after the usual period averaging, $c{\int }_0^{L}qds=VL$. This averaging is needed to avoid end-phase corrections for an arbitrary fraction of a wavelength. Substitution of $\mathbf{w}$ into the thrust expression now givesFor $\gamma ={\kappa }_T/{\kappa }_N$ and $r=1-\gamma$, this is $T/({\kappa }_{N}L)=Vr(1-\beta )-U(1-r\beta )$. The swimming body is force-free, so the reaction thrust on the head-tail assembly balances its head drag. Thus $T=\delta {\kappa }_{N}LU$, and linear resistive-force propulsion of a travelling filament givesWe henceforth assume $0<\gamma <1$, $\delta \ge 0$ and $0<\beta <1$. Isotropic resistance, $\gamma =1$, gives no propulsion in this model.

The flagellar contribution to viscous dissipation is the positive quadratic form $P_f=\int \mathbf{w}\cdot K\mathbf{w}ds$. Expanding it, and using $c⟨q⟩=V$, givesThere is also head dissipation $\delta {\kappa }_{N}L{U}^2$. Equivalently, the work of the flagellar deformation relative to the translating head is $P_f+UT$; the force balance makes $UT$ precisely the head dissipation. Consequently, with $\alpha =V/c$,This derives the rate of working, rather than merely inferring it from the thrust.

The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality gives ${\alpha }^2=⟨q{⟩}^2\le ⟨q^2⟩=\beta$. Equality requires $q$ to be constant almost everywhere. For a planar periodic filament this is an ideal sawtooth with alternating transverse tangent and fixed axial tangent, or a limit with negligibly rounded corners. It is not an identity for a general sinusoidal wave, and the ideal calculation omits the elastic cost of sharp corners.

For the stipulated equality ${\alpha }^2=\beta$, put $d=1+\delta$ and eliminate $V$ at fixed $U$ using $V/U=(d-r\beta )/[r(1-\beta )]$. Direct simplification yieldsThe derivative isWriting $A=r({\delta }^2-\gamma )$ and $B=\gamma d^2$, the numerator is $A{\beta }^2+2B\beta -B$. It is negative at zero and equals $(\delta +\gamma {)}^2>0$ at one. Its derivative is positive throughout $(0,1)$: this is immediate if $A\ge 0$; if $A<0$, its minimum derivative is $2(A+B)=2(\delta +\gamma {)}^2>0$. Since $F$ diverges at both endpoints, the unique stationary point is the global fixed-speed energy optimum for a planar flagellum:This form includes the case $A=0$, when ${\beta }_{\ast }=1/2$, without a removable division by zero. With no head drag it reduces to ${\beta }_{\ast }=1/(1+\sqrt{\gamma })$.

The printed final optimality formula does not follow from the preceding thrust and power equations. For a concrete check, $\gamma =1/2$, $\delta =0$ gives $F=(2-\beta )/[\beta (1-\beta )]$. The derived minimum is at $\beta =2-\sqrt{2}$. The printed formula instead gives ${\beta }^2=\sqrt{6}-2$, hence $\beta \approx 0.67044$, where $F^{\prime }\ne 0$ and the expenditure is greater. Thus the thrust and working formulas can both be established as above, but the last printed conclusion must be replaced by the derived optimum.

For a Newtonian fluid, write $\mathbf{\sigma }=-pI+2\mu e$, where $e=(\nabla u+\nabla u^T)/2$ is the rate-of-strain tensor. The Stokes equation without body force gives ${\partial }_j{\sigma }_{ij}=0$. Since the stress tensor is symmetric, its contraction with the antisymmetric part of the velocity gradient is zero. ThusThe divergence theorem proves the boundary-work identityFor an incompressible flow, $\mathrm{tr}e=0$, so $D=2\mu {\int }_{V}e:edV\ge 0$ is precisely the viscous dissipation.

Apply this identity to the particle-free volume and then to the fluid outside the added particle. On the rigid particle, the velocity has the form $V+\Omega \times x$. Its contribution to the boundary work is $V\cdot F+\Omega \cdot T$, which vanishes because the particle is force-free and torque-free. The outer velocity is unchanged. Subtracting the two boundary-work identities therefore givesTo move this expression to the particle surface, apply the Lorentz reciprocal theorem to $(u_0,{\sigma }_0)$ and $(u^{\prime },{\sigma }^{\prime })$ in the punctured fluid domain. For completeness, its local proof isOn the outer boundary $u^{\prime }=0$. Let $N=-n$ be the particle-outward normal, opposite to the fluid-outward normal there. Integrating the preceding divergence identity givesThis expression includes the removal of the original fluid inside the particle; that removal must not be counted separately again.

For a sphere in a uniform straining Stokes flow, $E$ is symmetric and trace free, and $u_0=Ex$. Symmetry gives zero rigid translation and rotation. Put $H=x\cdot Ex$ and $r=|x|$. Use the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation printed on the paper, with the decaying harmonic potentialsTheir harmonicity follows from $x_i/r^3=-{\partial }_i(1/r)$ and from $H/r^5$ being a trace-free second derivative of $1/r$. Direct differentiation givesAt $r=a$, the no-slip boundary condition requires $u^{\prime }=-Ex$. Matching the independent $Ex$ and $Hx$ terms fixes $B=-1/2$ and $C=5/6$. The disturbance velocity and pressure are consequentlyThe pressure follows from $p^{\prime }=2\mu \nabla \cdot {\Phi }^{\prime }$. The disturbance decays, the total velocity vanishes at the sphere, and the harmonic representation verifies the Stokes equation. The boundary traction has zero total force by odd symmetry, and zero total torque because $E$ is symmetric, confirming the assumed force-free and torque-free motion.

At the sphere $u^{\prime }=-u_0$, so the extra dissipation due to a rigid inclusion becomes ${\int }_A{u}_0\cdot ({\sigma }_0+{\sigma }^{\prime })NdS$. Contracting the supplied total stress tensor with $N$ cancels its terms proportional to $(N\cdot EN)N$, leaving $5\mu EN$. ThusUsing ${\int }_A{N}_i{N}_{j}dS=4\pi a^2{\delta }_{ij}/3$ proves the single-sphere dissipation increaseOne may perform the comparison in a large bounded vessel with prescribed straining velocity and then take its size to infinity; the given near-sphere approximation makes this limit compatible with the fixed-outer-velocity definition of $D^{\prime }$.

The sphere number density is $n_s=\varphi /(4\pi a^3/3)=3\varphi /(4\pi a^3)$. Neglecting hydrodynamic interactions, the additional viscous dissipation per unit volume is $n_s{D}^{\prime }=5\mu \varphi E:E$. Adding the particle-free value $2\mu E:E$ givesThis is the Einstein viscosity formula for a dilute suspension, to first order in the particle volume fraction.

Integrate axial force balance $\nabla \cdot \sigma =0$ over the fluid between the two remote tube sections, excluding the particle. The wall's axial traction contributesAt each remote section the Hagen-Poiseuille flow has $u_x$ independent of $x$, so ${\sigma }_{xx}=-p$. The downstream and upstream caps therefore contribute $-\pi a^{2}p(x_2)+\pi a^{2}p(x_1)$. The particle contributes zero net axial force because it is force-free. Adding the three contributions proves the wall-shear and pressure-drop balance in a tube:Here $p$ is the physical pressure. The sign follows from the outward normals on the two caps; no convention for a positive pressure-drop magnitude has yet been introduced.

Choose the axial origin at the sphere's centre. Reflection $x\mapsto -x$ leaves the straight tube, the spherical geometry and the transverse displacement of the centre unchanged. It reverses the prescribed axial Hagen-Poiseuille flow, while it leaves a hypothetical transverse particle velocity unchanged. On the other hand, kinematic reversibility of Stokes flow says that reversing the imposed flow reverses every particle velocity, including that transverse component. The force-free and torque-free constraints are preserved by both operations. Uniqueness of the coupled Stokes flow and rigid-body motion therefore makes the transverse velocity equal to its own negative. It must vanish.

Consequently $\dot{c}=0$ as the particle is advected. This is no lateral migration of a single sphere in a uniform tube in Stokes flow. The argument uses the fore-aft symmetry of a rigid sphere and a uniform tube; it does not extend automatically to inertial migration or deformable particles.

In this continuation $\lambda$ measures eccentricity, not the viscosity ratio used in Question 2. Take $ϵ\to 0$ with $0\le \lambda <1$ fixed. For the nearly occluding sphere in a cylindrical tube, the narrow gap has thickness $H\sim ϵa$ and axial length $\ell \sim a\sqrt{ϵ}$, obtained by balancing $h_0$ and $x^2/(2a)$. In the sphere frame the tangential velocity scale is $U$. The lubrication approximation then gives the gap scalesThe large local pressure excursion is distinct from the eventual net pressure jump. Away from the sphere the velocity varies across a radius $a$, so the far Hagen-Poiseuille flow hasThese scales also show why the gap pressure can be much larger than its shear stress while the leading net jump can be smaller than that pressure.

Use $y=a-r$, so $y=0$ is the moving tube wall and $y=h$ is the locally stationary sphere. The no-slip boundary conditions are $u(0)=-U$, $u(h)=0$. Integrating $\mu u_{yy}=p_x$, with pressure independent of $y$ to leading order, gives the Couette-Poiseuille flow in a thin gapDifferentiate at both surfaces and eliminate $p_x$ using this moving-boundary lubrication flux:The coordinate reversal means ${\sigma }_{rx}=-{\sigma }_{xy}$ at the tube wall.

At leading order $q$ is independent of $x$ in each angular strip, though it may depend on $\theta$. Both boundaries are stationary as shapes in the sphere frame and impermeable, so the integrated continuity equation is $q_x+a^{-1}(q_{\theta }^{\mathrm{circ}}{)}_{\theta }=0$. The pressure changes along $x$ over $a\sqrt{ϵ}$ but along the circumference over $a$. Thus circumferential velocity is only $O(U\sqrt{ϵ})$, and its flux is $O(Ua{ϵ}^{3/2})$. Circumferential flux divergence is smaller than the possible leading axial divergence by a factor $ϵ$. Consequently $q_x=0$ to the order needed. This is not an assumption of equal flux at different angular positions.

For fixed $\theta$ define the lubrication resistance integrals for a nearly occluding sphereIn particular, $J_1=\pi \sqrt{2a/h_0}$, $J_2=J_1/(2h_0)$ and $J_3=3J_1/(8h_0^2)$. The local pressure relation givesA putative generic value $q=O(U{h}_0)$ makes this jump $O(\mu U/(a{ϵ}^{3/2}))$. However, the integrated wall shear in part (ii) is only $O(\mu Ua/\sqrt{ϵ})$, so the force-free global balance permits a common net pressure jump only of order $\mu U/(a\sqrt{ϵ})$. The outer flow has circumferentially uniform pressures on both sides. Therefore the $O({ϵ}^{-3/2})$ pressure jump must cancel in every angular strip, not merely after angular averaging. The pressure recovery condition in lubrication flow determinesThis explains how the leading-order part of the global force balance selects the local flux.

The total sphere-frame volume flux is nowTransforming back to the laboratory adds $\pi a^{2}U$, so $Q_{\mathrm{lab}}=\pi a^{2}U(1-4ϵ/3)$ to this order. For physical pressure, Hagen-Poiseuille flow gives $Q_{\mathrm{lab}}=-\pi a^4{p}_x/(8\mu )$. ThusThe printed positive expression is the pressure-drop gradient in the direction of the laboratory flow; the Poiseuille hint omits the minus sign when $p_x$ is read as the derivative of physical pressure. With the specified wall velocity $-U$, the laboratory flow is positive and its physical pressure gradient is negative.

Next insert the leading flux into the wall shear stress:Let $\Delta p>0$ be the localized extra pressure drop, after subtracting the regular far Poiseuille gradient. Contributions outside the neck are only $O(\mu U/a)$ and are smaller than the $O({ϵ}^{-1/2})$ jump. Since ${\sigma }_{rx}=-{\sigma }_{xy}$, part (ii) gives $\pi a^2\Delta p=a\int \int {\sigma }_{xy}(0)dxd\theta$. Hence the leading pressure drop isFor example, the concentric limit is $\Delta p\sim 4\pi \mu U\sqrt{2/ϵ}/a$. The integral grows as the minimum gap shrinks; the fixed-$\lambda <1$ qualification prevents treating a further near-contact limit as uniformly covered.

On the sphere the leading shear stress is ${\sigma }_{xy}(h)=-2\mu U/h+4\mu U{h}_0/h^2$, soPositive and negative tangential stresses cancel within each angular strip. Thus the leading tangential resultant, and its leading torque contribution, vanish: negligible rotation is consistent with the torque-free condition. The shear is not zero pointwise, and the pressure forces are not zero. Pressure on a sphere cannot produce a torque about its centre because its normal is radial; its force contributions and the matched far pressure jump remain essential to the force-free transport of a nearly occluding sphere.

For an incompressible flow, write the Newtonian fluid stress tensor as $\sigma =-pI+2\mu e$, where $e=(\nabla u+\nabla u^T)/2$ is the rate-of-strain tensor. The Stokes equation gives ${\partial }_j{\sigma }_{ij}=0$. Symmetry of the Cauchy stress tensor therefore givesIntegrating and applying the divergence theorem expresses the viscous dissipation as boundary power:At a moving rigid body, the surface velocity is $U+\Omega \times (x-x_c)$. Its boundary-power contribution is $U\cdot F+\Omega \cdot G$, with the force and torque evaluated using the fluid's outward normal vector. Both resultants vanish for a force-free, torque-free inclusion. Thus the new viscous dissipation comes entirely from the unchanged outer boundary velocity. Subtracting the particle-free boundary power givesApply the Lorentz reciprocal theorem to $(u_0,{\sigma }_0)$ and $(u^{\prime },{\sigma }^{\prime })$ in the fluid outside the inclusion. On the outer boundary $u^{\prime }=0$, soWriting $n_p=-n$ for the particle's outward normal vector gives the required extra dissipation due to a rigid inclusion:This subtraction already accounts for the fluid volume displaced by the inclusion; it is not just the integral of the disturbance's local viscous dissipation.

For the sphere, the ambient rate-of-strain tensor $E$ is symmetric and trace free. The sphere in a uniform straining Stokes flow has zero translational and rotational velocity: inversion symmetry eliminates its force, and symmetry of $E$ eliminates its torque. To derive the disturbance, put $r=|x|$, $Q=x\cdot Ex$ and seekThe incompressible flow condition and Stokes equation reduce toA decaying family satisfying these equations is $f=A{r}^{-5}$, $g=B{r}^{-5}-5A{r}^{-7}/2$, $j=2B{r}^{-5}$. The no-slip boundary condition requires $f(a)=-1$ and $g(a)=0$, so $A=-a^5$ and $B=-5a^3/2$. ConsequentlyThe total velocity is zero at $r=a$, and the disturbance decays as $r^{-2}$. The pressure constant has been set to zero. These boundary and far-field conditions, together with Uniqueness of Stokes flow, establish the solution. There is no rotational background in a pure strain flow.

On the sphere $u^{\prime }=-u_0=-aE{n}_p$. Contracting the supplied Newtonian fluid stress tensor with $n_p$ makes its two terms proportional to $(n_p\cdot E{n}_p)n_p$ cancel, leaving $\sigma n_p=5\mu E{n}_p$. Hence the extra dissipation due to a rigid inclusion isHere ${\int }_{S^2}{n}_j{n}_{k}d\Omega =4\pi {\delta }_{jk}/3$. Taking the large outer boundary limit only after using the fixed-boundary power identity avoids replacing that prescribed boundary by an uncontrolled boundary at infinity.

If $N_v$ denotes the number of spheres per unit volume, $N_v(4\pi a^3/3)=\varphi$. ThusAdd this to the particle-free viscous dissipation density $2\mu E:E$. Comparing with $2{\mu }_{\mathrm{eff}}E:E$ gives the Einstein viscosity formula for a dilute suspension:to first order in $\varphi$. The hydrodynamic interactions neglected here contribute beyond that dilute order.

Sphere 2 is now force-free and torque-free. Its translation and spin follow the incident rigid-motion components, so it emits neither a Stokeslet nor a rotlet. Its first disturbance is a stresslet from the incident rate of strain, of magnitude $\mu a^3(a|\mathbf{V}|/R^2)$. Its return velocity at sphere 1 is consequently $O(a^4|\mathbf{V}|/R^4)$:More precisely, that leading correction is $-(15/4){ϵ}^4(\mathbf{V}\cdot \mathbf{n})\mathbf{n}$. It vanishes for purely transverse forcing, for which the first translational correction is of order ${ϵ}^6$.

The first-return spin requires an additional cancellation. The leading incident strain at sphere 2 isIt is axisymmetric about the line of centers, so the reflected stresslet has zero vorticity at sphere 1 on that axis. A naive vorticity estimate of order $(|\mathbf{V}|/a){ϵ}^5$ therefore has zero coefficient. The finite-size correction to the incident strain and the next force-free scattering multipoles are two powers of $ϵ$ smaller; these generically giveThis suppressed spin from a force-free distant sphere is also consistent with the reciprocal torque-to-self-translation coupling. Purely longitudinal forcing gives zero spin exactly by axial symmetry. Distinguishing the stresslet's on-axis curl from its generic off-axis scale is essential here.

Taking the curl of the Brinkman equation eliminates pressure and the constant matrix velocity. With $\mathbf{u}=({\psi }_y,-{\psi }_x)$ and vorticity $-{\nabla }^2\psi$, the Brinkman swimming sheet equation isThe surface conditions are conditions on partial derivatives evaluated on the moving boundary:At infinity, ${\psi }_y\to \mathcal{U}$ and ${\psi }_x\to 0$. The derivative of $\psi$ along the surface also equals $ϵ\cos \xi$, because ${\psi }_y=0$ there, so a convenient gauge has $\psi (x,ϵ\sin \xi ,t)=ϵ\sin \xi$. Decaying perturbations and the force-free condition determine the swimming solution.

A Taylor expansion of the tangential no-slip boundary condition gives $u_{2x}(0)=-\sin \xi {\partial }_y{u}_{1x}(0)$. Since $f^{\prime \prime }(0)=-s$,For matrix-relative Brinkman velocity, the mean second-order tangential flow isThe mean tangential traction has no first-order geometric remainder: at the surface ${\partial }_y{\sigma }_{xy,1}=s(s+1)\sin \xi$ and ${\sigma }_{xx,1}=s(s+1)\cos \xi$, so the mean displaced-boundary and tilted-normal corrections cancel. Thus the force-free condition gives ${\overline{u}}_{2x}^{\prime }(0)=0$, hence $C=0$. In the $A=0$ limit boundedness likewise excludes mean shear. The swimming speed of a Brinkman sheet is thereforeIt is larger than the simple-fluid speed by $\sqrt{1+(\alpha /k{)}^2}$ for fixed waveform and frequency. The matrix offers a reaction structure for the transverse stroke and more strongly confines the induced motion; it acts as a footing against which the wave pushes. This is a prescribed-stroke comparison, not a guarantee at fixed motor power. The small-amplitude expansion is at fixed $A$; a large-$A$ use also needs $ϵs\ll 1$ to control variation across the displaced boundary.