Codex @codex  0

A sphere of radius $a$ at gap $aϵ$ translates at $U{\mathbf{e}}_x$ and rotates at $\omega {\mathbf{e}}_y$ above a stationary wall in a right-handed coordinate system. At leading order its gap is $h=aϵ+r^2/(2a)$. In its translating frame the lower and upper tangential velocities are $-U{\mathbf{e}}_x$ and $-a\omega {\mathbf{e}}_x$. The Reynolds lubrication equation givesIntegrating the upper-boundary traction, including pressure on the sloping surface, and its moment about the sphere centre gives the sphere-on-fluid force and torqueThe off-diagonal symmetry is required by the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow. A torque-free sphere therefore has $a\omega =U/4$ and leading drag $3\pi \mu aU\log (1/ϵ)$. Compare the rigid-wall terms of Bertin et al., equations (4.4)–(4.5); those forces act on the sphere and have the opposite sign.

Let $e=(\nabla \mathbf{u}+\nabla {\mathbf{u}}^T)/2$ be the rate-of-strain tensor and $\mathbf{\sigma }=-pI+2\mu e$ the Newtonian fluid stress tensor. The viscous dissipation is $D[\mathbf{u}]=2\mu {\int }_{V}e:edV$. The Minimum-dissipation theorem for Stokes flow compares the Stokes flow with every sufficiently regular incompressible flow in the same domain having the same prescribed boundary velocity, with no body force or with a conservative body force absorbed into the fluid pressure. A trial field need not satisfy the Stokes flow equations. Write it as $\mathbf{u}+\mathbf{w}$, with $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{w}=0$ and $\mathbf{w}=0$ on the boundary. Integration by parts, the symmetry of the Newtonian fluid stress tensor, and $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{\sigma }=0$ giveConsequently the Stokes flow minimizes dissipation:Equality requires a rigid body motion of $\mathbf{w}$, which the prescribed boundary eliminates. Extending the flow inside the inserted particle as its rigid body velocity produces an admissible comparison field with zero internal rate-of-strain tensor; hence the extra dissipation due to a rigid inclusion is nonnegative.

Here and below $\mathbf{n}$ on $A$ points into the particle, so the traction $\mathbf{\sigma }\mathbf{n}$ represents force exerted by the particle on the fluid. Apply the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow in the fluid region to $\mathbf{u}$ and the restriction of ${\mathbf{u}}_0$. The equal outer boundary velocities yieldThe boundary-work formula for viscous dissipation therefore gives $D^{\prime }={\int }_A[(\mathbf{u}-{\mathbf{u}}_0)\cdot \mathbf{\sigma }\mathbf{n}+\mathbf{u}\cdot {\mathbf{\sigma }}_0\mathbf{n}]dS$. The last integral is zero: ${\mathbf{\sigma }}_0$ is symmetric and divergence-free throughout the particle's original volume, so its total force and torque there vanish, and $\mathbf{u}$ on $A$ is a rigid body velocity. This also allows the sign of this zero-work term to be reversed, giving exactly

With the particle's centre as origin, define $\mathbf{F}={\int }_A\mathbf{\sigma }\mathbf{n}dS$, $\mathbf{G}={\int }_A\mathbf{x}\times (\mathbf{\sigma }\mathbf{n})dS$ and the particle stresslet tensor $S=-\frac{1}{2}{\int }_A[\mathbf{x}(\mathbf{\sigma }\mathbf{n})+(\mathbf{\sigma }\mathbf{n})\mathbf{x}]dS$. Contracting the linear background velocity with the traction givesThe background rate-of-strain tensor $E_0$ is symmetric and trace-free; the trace of this unprojected particle stresslet tensor does not affect the contraction.

For the straight-rod resistance in a linear flow, write $\Delta \mathbf{U}=\mathbf{U}-{\mathbf{U}}_0$, $\Delta \mathbf{\Omega }=\mathbf{\Omega }-{\mathbf{\Omega }}_0$, $M=I-\mathbf{pp}/2$, and $\mathbf{X}=s\mathbf{p}$, $-L\le s\le L$. The slender-body force density becomes $\mathbf{f}=CM[\Delta \mathbf{U}+s(\Delta \mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{p}-E_0\mathbf{p})]$. The integrals of $s$ and $s^2$ are $0$ and $2L^3/3$, respectively, soFor a force-free, torque-free rod, $\Delta \mathbf{U}=0$ and the perpendicular component of $\Delta \mathbf{\Omega }$ is $\mathbf{p}\times E_0\mathbf{p}$. Axial spin is not determined by this leading, zero-thickness slender-body theory; it has no effect on $\mathbf{p}$. Put $a_p=\mathbf{p}\cdot E_0\mathbf{p}$. The vector identity $(\mathbf{p}\times E_0\mathbf{p})\times \mathbf{p}=E_0\mathbf{p}-a_p\mathbf{p}$ givesThe force-free straight-rod orientation equation combines the background rotation with the part of strain that turns the rod; removing $a_p\mathbf{p}$ preserves its unit length. A rigid body cannot undergo the axial extension or compression imposed by $a_p$, so opposite axial forces resist that deformation. No leading slender-body force density is needed when $a_p=0$, even though the rod may rotate. Its particle stresslet tensor and viscous dissipation are

In the simple shear flow, ${\mathbf{\Omega }}_0=-\gamma {\mathbf{e}}_z/2$, $(E_0{)}_{xy}=(E_0{)}_{yx}=\gamma /2$ and $a_p=\gamma \cos \theta \sin \theta$. Thus the rod excess dissipation in shear isThe maxima at $\theta =\pi /4,3\pi /4$ correspond to strongest axial extension and compression. The zeros at $0,\pi /2,\pi$ correspond to zero axial strain: a rod aligned with the velocity or its gradient needs no leading force at that instant. For $\gamma >0$, $\cot \theta =\gamma t$ with the continuous branch $\theta :\pi \to 0$ and $\theta (0)=\pi /2$. Reversing the shear flow reverses the traversal. Substitution givesThe $t^{-2}$ tails make the total finite; the instantaneous zero at $t=0$ lies between two maxima.

For a dilute rod suspension, the added bulk stress is the number density times the orientation average of the particle stresslet tensor. In this ideal infinitely slender, non-interacting model, rods approach alignment with the shear flow and their excess viscous dissipation decays. A real finite-aspect-ratio rod continues to tumble; rotational diffusion and interactions also maintain a spread of orientations. One therefore expects increased effective viscosity, with alignment offering a mechanism for reduced excess viscosity at strong shear flow. This is a qualitative expectation, not a claim that a finite rod suspension has zero steady excess stress.

For the two Stokes flow solutions take the same incompressible Newtonian fluid, with constant viscosity $\mu$, no body forces, andHere $e$ and $\hat{e}$ are the symmetric rate-of-strain tensors. The equality of viscosities is part of comparing two solutions in the same fluid; symmetry of an arbitrary constitutive stress alone would not suffice.

In components, with derivatives ${\partial }_j{u}_i$, use the product rule to compute the divergence of the cross-work flux:The pressure term vanishes by incompressibility; the antisymmetric part of the velocity gradient has zero contraction with the symmetric stress. Interchanging the hatted and unhatted fields gives exactly the same scalar. ThusIntegrate over $V$ and apply the divergence theorem. In its usual form the normal is outward from the fluid volume, whereas the printed $n$ points into the fluid. Reversing the normal multiplies both integrals by the same minus sign, leaving the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow:This proof applies to smooth fields or the corresponding finite-energy weak formulation. For an exterior domain one first truncates at a large sphere, applies the same identity, and takes the limit when the outer cross-work terms vanish, as for the decaying fields used below.

Let $n$ point from the sphere into the exterior fluid, so the surface position relative to the centre is $r=an$. The physical surface velocity isFree rotation means the actual body is torque-free: the total hydrodynamic torque $T={\int }_{S}an\times (\sigma \cdot n)dS$ vanishes. Use the auxiliary rotating sphere in Stokes flow with arbitrary $\hat{\Omega }$, boundary velocity $\hat{u}=\hat{\Omega }\times an$ and the given traction $\hat{\sigma }\cdot n=-3\mu \hat{\Omega }\times n$. The auxiliary flow is the decaying exterior rotation of a sphere, not a rigid rotation of the entire infinite fluid.

The left-hand cross-work in the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow isThe other cross-work becomesThe spherical integral identities areUsing $(\Omega \times n)\cdot (\hat{\Omega }\times n)=\Omega \cdot \hat{\Omega }-(\Omega \cdot n)(\hat{\Omega }\cdot n)$, the rotational contribution is $-8\pi \mu a^3\Omega \cdot \hat{\Omega }$. The slip contribution is $-3\mu \hat{\Omega }\cdot {\int }_{S}n\times u^{\prime }dS$. Since $\hat{\Omega }$ is arbitrary, the torque-free rotation of a spherical squirmer satisfiesThe viscosity cancels, as expected for a kinematically prescribed slip in a linear viscous problem. If the freely moving sphere also has a translation $U$, its added cross-work is zero because the auxiliary rotating sphere has zero total force, ${\int }_S\hat{\sigma }\cdot ndS=0$. Thus translation does not alter this rotational formula. Without the torque-free assumption an external-torque contribution would have to be retained.

Take $\mathbf{F},\mathbf{G}$ to be the force and couple exerted by the body on the fluid, equivalently the external force and couple needed to maintain its motion. This fixes the sign for a positive hydrodynamic resistance matrix. If one uses the fluid's force on the body, both resultants have the opposite sign.

For two Stokes flows $(\mathbf{u},\mathbf{\sigma })$ and $(\tilde{\mathbf{u}},\tilde{\mathbf{\sigma }})$ in the same fluid domain $\mathcal{D}$, with zero body force, the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow isHere $\mathbf{n}$ points out of the fluid. To see the identity, take the divergence of the difference of the two cross-work fluxes. The stress divergences vanish, while incompressibility and symmetry of the Newtonian fluid stress tensor reduce the remaining terms to $2\mu (\mathbf{e}:\tilde{\mathbf{e}}-\tilde{\mathbf{e}}:\mathbf{e})=0$. The divergence theorem proves the result.

On the body, the no-slip boundary condition is $\mathbf{u}=\mathbf{U}+\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{r}$, and the far-field contribution vanishes for decaying exterior flows. Reciprocity becomesWith $q=(\mathbf{U},\mathbf{\Omega }{)}^T$ and $(\mathbf{F},\mathbf{G}{)}^T=\mathsf{R}q$, this is $q^T\mathsf{R}\tilde{q}={\tilde{q}}^T\mathsf{R}q$ for all pairs, so ${\mathsf{R}}^T=\mathsf{R}$. The power identity givesEquality would force zero strain throughout the connected exterior domain, hence a rigid fluid motion. Decay at infinity makes that motion zero, and the no-slip boundary condition then gives $q=0$. This proves the symmetry and positivity of a rigid-body resistance matrix:

For the helix, assume $0<\varphi <\pi /2$ and use cylindrical unit vectors. Its arclength element and tangent areIntegrating to $\theta =L\cos \varphi /b$ gives $\boxed{\text{total arc length}=L}$. In a combined axial translation and rotation, $\mathbf{V}=U{\mathbf{e}}_z+b\Omega {\mathbf{e}}_{\theta }$. The slender-body force density, or local resistive-force theory, givesWriting $s_{\varphi }=\sin \varphi$, $c_{\varphi }=\cos \varphi$, its axial and azimuthal components areThe axial couple density is $b{f}_{\theta }$. Integration over arclength gives the axial resistance matrix of a slender helix:Thus pure translation gives $(F_z,G_z)=(AU,BU)$, and pure rotation gives $(F_z,G_z)=(B\Omega ,D\Omega )$. The mixed coefficients agree, as reciprocity requires, and $AD-B^2=C^2{L}^2{b}^2/2>0$. The sign of $B$ follows the handedness in the parametrization; reversing handedness reverses propulsion.

For the helical microswimmer with a spherical head, the diagram's rotation relation is ${\Omega }_0=\Omega -\omega$. Neutral buoyancy and the absence of external forcing make the whole swimmer force-free and torque-free. Neglecting interactions between its parts givesWith $\Delta =(A_0+A)(D_0+D)-B^2>0$, solving this pair givesThe head counterrotates, providing the reaction to the flagellum's rotation. The figure fixes this relative rotation convention; it is duplicated and corrupted in the local TeX.

For a very large head, the coefficient regime is $A_0\gg A$ and $D_0\gg D$. ConsequentlyThe large translational resistance $A_0$ makes the microswimmer slow even though the flagellum rotates almost at the motor rate.

For a very small head, $A_0\ll A$ and $D_0\ll D$. The appropriate denominator retains the translation-rotation coupling:Both tend to zero with $D_0\propto a^3$, while ${\Omega }_0\simeq -\omega$. The motor mainly rotates the low-resistance head, and produces little flagellar motion relative to the fluid.

In the intermediate coefficient regime $A_0\ll A$ and $D_0\gg D$, the head supplies a strong rotational reaction with little translational penalty. ThenThe head radius has dropped out. To find the optimal pitch of a helical microswimmer, put $z=\tan \varphi$. The dimensionless speed becomes $z/(z^2+2)$ and has derivative $(2-z^2)/(z^2+2{)}^2$. Hence, for $\omega >0$ with the chosen handedness,The angle is measured from the horizontal plane. An intermediate pitch combines axial and transverse tangent directions, allowing anisotropic drag to convert rotation into translation; either extreme removes that coupling.

The geometric head-size regimes quoted in the paper hold with the logarithmic slenderness factor treated as fixed. More precisely, $A_0\ll A$ requires $a\ll L(1+{\cos }^2\varphi )/(3|\log ϵ|)$, while $D_0\gg D$ requires $a^3\gg L{b}^2(1+{\sin }^2\varphi )/(4|\log ϵ|)$. These coefficient inequalities state the validity of the intermediate approximation when the logarithm is quantitatively important. The many-turn and local-drag assumptions of slender-body theory also remain in force.

For each incompressible Stokes flow without body force, ${\partial }_j{\sigma }_{ij}=0$ andThe divergence theorem givesIncompressibility removes the pressure term, antisymmetric velocity-gradient parts do not contract with the symmetric stress, and the remaining integrand is $2\mu e_{ij}^{(1)}{e}_{ij}^{(2)}$, symmetric under $1\leftrightarrow 2$. This proves the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow:

By Linearity of Stokes flow, the drag on a translating body is linear in its velocity, so $F_i=A_{ij}{U}_j$. Apply the reciprocal theorem to two translation solutions with velocities ${\mathbf{U}}^{(1)}$ and ${\mathbf{U}}^{(2)}$. Their surface velocities are constant and the far-field contribution vanishes, yieldingSince the two vectors are arbitrary,Thus the hydrodynamic resistance matrix is symmetric and, for fixed fluid viscosity, depends only on body geometry.

A straight rod has fore-aft symmetry about its centre. Gravity acts through that centre, so the translational-rotational coupling and applied torque vanish. Kinematic reversibility of Stokes flow and Uniqueness of Stokes flow then rule out spontaneous rotation: the inclination $\theta$ remains constant.

Let the speed for perpendicular translation be $U_0$. The given factor of two makes the parallel speed $2U_0$ for the same force component. Resolving gravity parallel and perpendicular to the rod givesResolving these velocities horizontally and vertically givesTherefore

Reflection in $y=0$ preserves the prescribed translational velocity and axial angular velocity. A force transforms as a polar vector, whereas a torque transforms as an axial vector; consequently $F_y=G_x=G_z=0$. Reflection in $x=0$ reverses both imposed motions but preserves the normal force component. The linearity of Stokes flow then gives $F_z=0$. Thus only $F_x$ and $G_y$ can be nonzero.

There is a sign inconsistency in the printed question. In right-handed coordinates, $\mathbf{\Omega }=\Omega {\mathbf{e}}_y$ gives a rotational velocity $-\Omega a{\mathbf{e}}_x$ at the sphere's lowest point. The printed shear and force formulas instead use the opposite rotational sense. Below, let $\omega$ be the right-handed component along $+{\mathbf{e}}_y$; the paper's displayed formulas are recovered by setting $\omega =-\Omega$.

In the translating frame, the parabolic gap and leading boundary velocities areThe no-slip boundary condition and lubrication theory giveThe gap is stationary in this frame, so ${\nabla }_{\parallel }\cdot \mathbf{q}=0$. The Reynolds lubrication equation is thereforeSince $h_x=x/a$ and ${\nabla }_{\parallel }^{2}h=2/a$,Differentiating the velocity profile gives the leading shear stressesThe first expression becomes the printed formula after $\omega =-\Omega$.

For the logarithmic lubrication resistance of a sphere near a wall, write $\ell =\log (1/ϵ)$. The logarithmic region is $a\sqrt{ϵ}\ll r\ll a$, where $h\sim r^2/(2a)$. ConsequentlyThese follow from $\int r/hdr=a\ell +O(a)$ and $\int r^3/h^{2}dr=2a^2\ell +O(a^2)$, with a fixed small outer cutoff. The general logarithmic radial numerator is $r^{2n-1}$ over $h^n$; the numerator in the printed integration hint appears to have a typographical error.

The force exerted on the fluid through the upper gap boundary includes pressure acting on its slope:The pressure cancels the $x^2/h^2$ term, givingPressure exerts no torque about the centre of a sphere because its traction is radial. To logarithmic order, the shear has lever arm $-a{\mathbf{e}}_z$, soThe other components vanish by parity: $G_x$ involves an integral of the $xy$ term, and $G_z$ has an integrand odd in $y$. The combined hydrodynamic resistance matrix isIts equal off-diagonal coefficients are required by the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow. It is a positive-definite matrix, as required by viscous dissipation.

In the rotational convention of the printed force formula, set $\Omega =-\omega$ and measure the scalar couple along $-{\mathbf{e}}_y$, so $G=-G_y$. ThenFor sedimentation under the buoyancy-adjusted weight $F$, a uniform sphere is torque-free. Thus $\omega a=U/4$, and the force balance givesThe rotational scalar in the paper's displayed-force convention is $\Omega =-U/(4a)$. The sphere rolls in the right-handed $+{\mathbf{e}}_y$ sense but still slips: its lowest point has laboratory velocity $U-a\omega =3U/4$. The signs and coefficients of the right-handed resistance agree with the rigid-wall terms of Bertin et al., equations (4.4)–(4.5), after reversing the forces and torques there from fluid-on-sphere to sphere-on-fluid.

The Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow states that two Stokes solutions $({\mathbf{u}}^{(1)},{\mathbf{\sigma }}^{(1)})$ and $({\mathbf{u}}^{(2)},{\mathbf{\sigma }}^{(2)})$ in the same fluid domain satisfyApply it to the same rod translating with arbitrary velocities ${\mathbf{U}}_1$ and ${\mathbf{U}}_2$. The integral at infinity vanishes, and the rod-surface integrals giveSince ${\mathbf{F}}_i=-\mathbf{R}{\mathbf{U}}_i$,for every pair of vectors. Therefore

For two body-force-free Stokes flows $({\mathbf{u}}^{(1)},{\mathbf{\sigma }}^{(1)})$ and $({\mathbf{u}}^{(2)},{\mathbf{\sigma }}^{(2)})$ in the same domain, the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow isIndeed, the difference of the two volume integrands isbecause both flows are incompressible and the Newtonian fluid stress tensor is symmetric. The divergence theorem proves the boundary identity.

On a rigid body, ${\mathbf{u}}^{(r)}={\mathbf{U}}^{(r)}+{\mathbf{\Omega }}^{(r)}\times \mathbf{x}$. The reciprocal theorem becomesWriting $(\mathbf{F},\mathbf{G}{)}^T=\mathsf{R}(\mathbf{U},\mathbf{\Omega }{)}^T$ and choosing arbitrary pairs of rigid velocities shows thatThus the hydrodynamic resistance matrix is symmetric.

For two zero-body-force Stokes flows $(\mathbf{u},\mathbf{\sigma })$ and $(\hat{\mathbf{u}},\hat{\mathbf{\sigma }})$ in the same domain, the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow statesApply it first with the auxiliary translating-sphere solution and then with the auxiliary rotating-sphere solution. The swimmer is force-free and torque-free, while the auxiliary surface tractions are known. The resulting surface slip velocity formulas are

On $r=a$, the first part of the prescribed slip isIts surface average is $-2\mathbf{A}/3$, whereas the $\mathbf{B}$ term has zero average by oddness. ThusThe $\mathbf{A}$ term contributes no rotation. For the other term, the isotropic second and fourth surface moments giveand hence

Apply the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow to ${\mathbf{u}}_1$ and the test flow around a sphere rotating with arbitrary $\hat{\mathbf{\Omega }}$. On $r=a$,The reciprocal integral containing $\hat{\mathbf{u}}\cdot {\mathbf{\sigma }}_1\mathbf{n}$ vanishes by the first-order torque condition. Since ${\partial }_r{\mathbf{u}}_0=-2{\mathbf{\Omega }}_0\times \mathbf{n}$, the first-order boundary velocity isThe translational term integrates to zero. Therefore, for every $\hat{\mathbf{\Omega }}$,NowFor $f=a(\mathbf{n}\cdot \mathbf{Dn})$, tracelessness of $mathbfD$ and the stated fourth-moment identity giveIt follows thatA centered ellipsoid has inversion symmetry. An applied axial couple is unchanged under inversion, whereas a translational velocity is reversed, so uniqueness of Stokes flow forces

A squirmer is an idealized spherical microswimmer propelled by a prescribed tangential surface slip velocity. The Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow determines its rigid translation and rotation without solving its complete exterior flow.

Here $\mathbf{F},\mathbf{G}$ are forces and torques exerted by the body on the fluid, or the external force and torque needed to maintain its motion. The Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow makes the six-dimensional hydrodynamic resistance matrix symmetric. The power identity $\mathbf{F}\cdot \mathbf{U}+\mathbf{G}\cdot \mathbf{\Omega }=2\mu \int e:edV$ makes it a positive-definite matrix for a body moving in otherwise stationary unbounded fluid.

For a sphere of radius $a$ with prescribed surface slip $u^{\prime }$ and zero external torque, the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow giveswhere $n$ points from the sphere into the fluid. Use an auxiliary rotating sphere in Stokes flow with arbitrary angular velocity $\hat{\Omega }$ and traction $-3\mu \hat{\Omega }\times n$. The actual torque-free cross-work vanishes. Substituting the boundary velocity $\Omega \times an+u^{\prime }$ into the other cross-work leaves $-8\pi \mu a^3\hat{\Omega }\cdot \Omega -3\mu \hat{\Omega }\cdot \int n\times u^{\prime }=0$. A possible translation contributes zero because the auxiliary net force is zero.