Codex @codex  0

Use the quasi-geostrophic streamfunction convention $u_n=-{\psi }_{n,y}$, $v_n={\psi }_{n,x}$, and write $F=k_I^2$, $f=f_0+\beta y$. In a steady, large-scale basin interior, neglect the material derivatives of relative vorticity and interfacial stretching compared with advection of planetary vorticity. With small Rossby number, weak nonlinear eddy terms, no significant interior friction or topographic forcing, and the specified forcing confined to layer 1, Sverdrup balance isFor equal depths $h$, the depth-integrated meridional transport is $h({\bar{v}}_1+{\bar{v}}_2)=hW/\beta$. Here $W$ is the normalized potential vorticity source appearing in the evolution equation. If the dimensional wind stress curl is used, its usual layer forcing is $W=({\nabla }_h\times \mathbf{\tau }{)}_z/({\rho }_{0}h)$, so $\beta h({\bar{v}}_1+{\bar{v}}_2)=({\nabla }_h\times \mathbf{\tau }{)}_z/{\rho }_0$.

For $\beta >0$ and $W<0$, the upper-layer interior transport is southward. In a closed subtropical basin, negative wind stress curl also corresponds to downwelling Ekman pumping for $f_0>0$ and an anticyclonic gyre. A northward return transport is needed to close the circulation; its narrow western boundary current requires processes outside the frictionless Sverdrup balance. The local interior equations by themselves do not specify the detailed boundary-current structure.

Expanding the layer equation shows the physical budget:The first term is the change of planetary vorticity as a fluid parcel moves north or south. The second is the change of relative vorticity. The last is vortex stretching in layered quasi-geostrophic flow: displacement of the interface changes layer thickness and thus the stretching contribution to potential vorticity. Its opposite signs in the two layer definitions express their thickness changes in opposite directions. The wind stress curl supplies or removes upper-layer potential vorticity. Each $D_n/Dt$ follows its own layer velocity, rather than a common velocity for both layers.

For uniform $W$, choose the local two-layer Sverdrup interiorUnforced background zonal currents and arbitrary additive interface offsets have been set to zero. This choice is also an exact uniform-flow solution of the stated forced equations, not just a leading balance: ${\bar{q}}_1=f_0+\beta y-FVx$, ${\bar{q}}_2=f_0+\beta y+FVx$, and ${\bar{v}}_1{\bar{q}}_{1,y}=V\beta =W$. The local interface slope can be nonzero even though its stretching contribution is constant along each basic-state trajectory. A streamfunction linear in $x$ is an interior-patch description, not a complete globally bounded basin solution.

Take the primitive state vector $\mathbf{U}=(\rho ,p,u_x,u_y,u_z,B_x,B_y,B_z{)}^T$, with $\rho >0$. In the absence of gravity, the ideal magnetohydrodynamic equations are first order: expanding the material derivatives, pressure gradient and Lorentz force makes every term linear in a spatial derivative of $\mathbf{U}$, with coefficients depending on $\mathbf{U}$. Dividing momentum balance by $\rho$ therefore gives a quasilinear partial differential equation system ${\partial }_t\mathbf{U}+A_i(\mathbf{U}){\partial }_i\mathbf{U}=0$ with eight-by-eight matrices. The solenoidal magnetic-field constraint is an additional constraint on initial data; the ideal magnetohydrodynamic induction equation preserves it because the divergence of a curl vanishes.

For a one-dimensional simple wave in magnetohydrodynamics, write $\mathbf{U}=\mathbf{U}(q(x,t))$ with a nonzero state-space tangent. Substitution gives ${\mathbf{U}}_q{q}_t+A_x{\mathbf{U}}_q{q}_x=0$. A nonconstant profile requires the tangent to be a right eigenvector of $A_x$:The chain rule then gives the wave-speed equation:This is the Inviscid Burgers equation, including the special case of constant $v$. Its characteristic curves are $x=a+v_0(a)t$, with $v=v_0(a)$. As long as the mapping remains invertible,Thus a region with $v_0^{\prime }<0$ steepens: faster characteristics catch slower ones, and the first gradient catastrophe occurs at $t_{\ast }=-1/{\min }_a{v}_0^{\prime }(a)$ when the minimum is negative. A genuinely nonlinear compressive simple wave therefore forms a shock wave. Rarefactive profiles can spread instead; steepening is not inevitable for every initial profile.

To continue past this time, use weak solutions of the conservative mass, momentum, fluid total-energy equation and ideal magnetohydrodynamic induction equation. The Rankine-Hugoniot conditions fix the jumps and shock velocity, while physical entropy production selects admissible magnetohydrodynamic shocks. Diffusive shock wave layers are replaced by moving discontinuities, so their microscopic structure need not be explicitly resolved. In particular, the smooth adiabatic pressure equation must be replaced by total-energy conservation when imposing the ideal magnetohydrodynamic shock conditions.

For the Alfvén waves, impose the one-dimensional solenoidal magnetic-field constraint, so $B_x$ is constant and $\delta B_x=0$. Put ${\mathbf{B}}_{\perp }=(B_y,B_z)$ and $c=v-u_x$. The transverse components of the linearized ideal magnetohydrodynamic equations giveThe longitudinal momentum equation additionally gives $\delta p+{\mathbf{B}}_{\perp }\cdot \delta {\mathbf{B}}_{\perp }/{\mu }_0=0$. The Alfvén eigenvectors have $\delta \rho =\delta p=\delta u_x=0$, hence their transverse polarization is perpendicular to ${\mathbf{B}}_{\perp }$. For $s=\pm 1$, their speed and explicit right Alfvén characteristic eigenvectors areFor ${\mathbf{B}}_{\perp }\ne 0$ one may choose $(h_y,h_z)=(B_z,-B_y)$, up to a nonzero scalar factor. If ${\mathbf{B}}_{\perp }=0$, either transverse polarization is allowed and this characteristic speed is degenerate. These expressions describe the two propagating Alfvén branches for $B_x\ne 0$; if $B_x=0$, they coalesce with advected, nonpropagating transverse disturbances.

Integrating along an Alfvén simple wave leaves $\rho ,p,u_x,B_x$ unchanged and gives $d{\mathbf{u}}_{\perp }=-sd{\mathbf{B}}_{\perp }/\sqrt{{\mu }_0\rho }$ and ${\mathbf{B}}_{\perp }\cdot d{\mathbf{B}}_{\perp }=0$. Consequently the finite-amplitude nonlinear Alfvén wave relations areThe constant-magnitude condition is essential: otherwise a varying magnetic pressure would drive longitudinal compression. An arbitrary smooth phase profile gives an explicit family, $f_3=B_{\perp }\cos \Theta (x-v_{s}t)$ and $f_4=B_{\perp }\sin \Theta (x-v_{s}t)$, with $f_1,f_2$ as above. Direct substitution in the transverse momentum and ideal magnetohydrodynamic induction equation gives $(u_x-v_s){\mathbf{u}}_{\perp }^{\prime }=B_x{\mathbf{B}}_{\perp }^{\prime }/({\mu }_0\rho )$ and $(u_x-v_s){\mathbf{B}}_{\perp }^{\prime }=B_x{\mathbf{u}}_{\perp }^{\prime }$, confirming the solution without relying on the eigenvector argument. Longitudinal momentum holds because $p+B_{\perp }^2/(2{\mu }_0)$ is constant. The speed $v_s$ is independent of amplitude along this family: these linearly degenerate characteristic fields translate without steepening.

Use Faraday's law ${\partial }_t\mathbf{B}=-\nabla \times \mathbf{E}$ and the solenoidal magnetic-field constraint $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{B}=0$. In the nonrelativistic, single-fluid approximation, neglect Hall and other nonideal electromotive terms and use the moving-conductor moving-conductor Ohm law, $\mathbf{E}+\mathbf{u}\times \mathbf{B}=\mathbf{J}/\sigma$. Infinite electrical conductivity with finite current gives $\mathbf{E}=-\mathbf{u}\times \mathbf{B}$, henceThis is the ideal magnetohydrodynamic induction equation. For comparison, neglecting displacement current in Ampère-Maxwell equation gives $\mathbf{J}=\nabla \times \mathbf{B}/{\mu }_0$; with uniform finite electrical conductivity it produces magnetic diffusion ${\eta }_m{\nabla }^2\mathbf{B}$, where the magnetic diffusivity is ${\eta }_m=1/({\mu }_0\sigma )$. The ideal approximation requires a large magnetic Reynolds number $UL/{\eta }_m$. Dropping displacement current is useful for this finite-conductivity comparison, but Faraday's law and the ideal Ohm relation already suffice for the ideal induction equation.

Expanding the curl and using the solenoidal magnetic-field constraint gives the material derivative formCombine this with mass conservation, $D\rho /Dt=-\rho \nabla \cdot \mathbf{u}$, to obtainNow parametrize a material curve by a fixed label $a$: $\mathbf{X}(a,t)$ obeys ${\partial }_t\mathbf{X}=\mathbf{u}(\mathbf{X},t)$. Differentiating with respect to $a$ shows that its tangent $\mathbf{\ell }={\partial }_a\mathbf{X}$ evolves by $D\mathbf{\ell }/Dt=(\mathbf{\ell }\cdot \nabla )\mathbf{u}$. This is exactly the same linear ordinary differential equation as for $\mathbf{B}/\rho$. Initially parallel tangents remain parallel by uniqueness, with a label-dependent proportionality factor constant along each particle trajectory. Thus magnetic field lines are transported as material curves, wherever the field and fluid flow are smooth and the field is nonzero. This is the field-line form of magnetic flux freezing.

For the flux statement, take a material surface $\mathbf{X}(a,b,t)$ and let ${\mathbf{t}}_a={\partial }_a\mathbf{X}$, ${\mathbf{t}}_b={\partial }_b\mathbf{X}$. Both tangents obey $D{t}_i/Dt=({\partial }_j{u}_i)t_j$. Its oriented material surface element is $\mathbf{A}={\mathbf{t}}_a\times {\mathbf{t}}_{b}dadb$. Differentiating the cross product, rather than assuming its transport rule, givesEquivalently, $D\mathbf{A}/Dt=(\nabla \cdot \mathbf{u})\mathbf{A}-(\nabla \mathbf{u}{)}^T\mathbf{A}$, with $(\nabla \mathbf{u}{)}_{ij}={\partial }_j{u}_i$. Contracting this derived rule with the induction equation gives a pointwise cancellation:Integrating over the fixed material labels therefore proves conservation of flux through an open material surface:The surface need not be closed; its boundary is carried with the fluid. The result follows from material transport, rather than from the zero flux through a closed surface.

For a homologously shrinking cloud, write $V\sim L^3$ and keep its shape factors fixed. Conserved mass gives $\rho \sim M/L^3$; conserved magnetic flux gives $B\sim \Phi /L^2$. Thus the gravitational and magnetic energies scale aswhere $C_g,C_B>0$ are dimensionless geometry factors. Both grow in magnitude as $L^{-1}$, so collapse cannot reduce magnetic support relative to gravity while the mass-to-flux ratio is frozen. With negligible gas pressure, contraction lowers the combined potential energy only when its coefficient of $L^{-1}$ is negative. Consequently a necessary critical mass-to-flux ratio condition isHere $\Phi$ denotes the magnitude of the conserved threading flux. The numerical coefficient depends on geometry and boundary conditions; the scaling argument does not determine it or make the condition sufficient in the presence of other support.

For adiabatic pressure support during gravitational collapse, $p\propto {\rho }^{\gamma }\propto L^{-3\gamma }$. The pressure-support scale is $pV\propto L^{3-3\gamma }$, so relative to either gravity or magnetic energy,Pressure becomes more important as $L$ decreases if $\gamma >4/3$, equally important in scaling if $\gamma =4/3$, and less important if $\gamma <4/3$. In particular, a monatomic perfect gas with $\gamma =5/3$ becomes increasingly pressure supported. For isothermal pressure support during gravitational collapse, the isothermal equation of state gives $p\propto \rho \propto L^{-3}$, so $pV$ is constant and $pV/|W_g|\propto L$: isothermal pressure becomes less important during collapse. The same comparisons hold against magnetic support because its energy has the same $L^{-1}$ scaling as gravity.

In the surfactant transport with exchange relaxation, $DC/Dt$ is the material derivative following an interfacial material element. The term $-C{\nabla }_s\cdot {\mathbf{u}}_s$ accounts for dilution by tangential stretching, while $-C(\mathbf{u}\cdot \mathbf{n}){\nabla }_s\cdot \mathbf{n}$ accounts for changing area through normal motion and curvature. The surface diffusion term redistributes surfactant down concentration gradients. The exchange term relaxes its concentration towards $C_0$, through adsorption or desorption from a surrounding reservoir, on time scale $k^{-1}$.

In the bubble frame the spherical interface is stationary and impermeable. A steady material derivative is ${\mathbf{u}}_s\cdot {\nabla }_s{C}^{\prime }$. For a linear response in the rising speed this and $C^{\prime }{\nabla }_s\cdot {\mathbf{u}}_s$ are second order, whereas stretching of $C_0$ is first order. ThusRotational symmetry, linear response to $\mathbf{U}$, and zero normal velocity allow only ${\mathbf{u}}_s=AP\mathbf{U}$, where $P=I-\mathbf{nn}$ is the surface tangent projector. This is the dipolar, axisymmetric sector; axisymmetry alone, without the linear-response assumption, would allow other angular dependence.

On a sphere $\mathbf{n}=\mathbf{x}/r$ and ${\partial }_j{n}_i=({\delta }_{ij}-n_i{n}_j)/r$. Applying the surface tangent projector to the derivative gives the sphere surface derivative identitiesFor example, taking a second surface divergence of the first identity yields the third. Equivalently, the components of $\mathbf{n}$ are degree-one spherical harmonics. Hence a dipolar surfactant distribution solves the linear equation:The required smallness condition is $2|A|Ua/(k{a}^2+2D_s)\ll 1$. Surface diffusion or exchange must smooth the concentration faster than it is redistributed by the actual interfacial velocity. We require $k\ge 0$, $D_s\ge 0$ and $k{a}^2+2D_s>0$; with neither process there is no such steady linear balance at nonzero $A$. A small capillary number $\mu U/{\gamma }_0$ also justifies the spherical approximation.

Take the normal from the inner bubble to the outer liquid, define $[\sigma {]}_{-}^{+}={\sigma }_{+}-{\sigma }_{-}$, and set $\kappa ={\nabla }_s\cdot \mathbf{n}$. The interfacial stress balance with variable surface tension isBecause ${\nabla }_s{C}^{\prime }=BP\mathbf{U}/a$ and $\gamma ={\gamma }_0-{\gamma }_1{C}^{\prime }$, its tangential part becomesThis is a Marangoni stress: surface-tension gradients oppose the clean-bubble circulation.

Use the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation, $\mathbf{u}=\nabla (\mathbf{x}\cdot \mathbf{\Phi }+\chi )-2\mathbf{\Phi }$ and $p=2\mu \nabla \cdot \mathbf{\Phi }$. The constant vector potential gives $\mathbf{u}\to -\mathbf{U}$. In the decaying, linear axisymmetric sector, a vector monopole and scalar dipole provide the two constants needed at the sphere; other equivalent potential choices amount to a representation freedom. The PDF potential contains the factor $a$ omitted in the TeX aid. With that factor restored, the exterior velocity isAt the interface, no penetration gives $\beta -\alpha =1/2$, and the tangential velocity gives $A=-(1+\alpha +\beta )$. Using the traction coefficient printed in equation (3), the tangential stress condition gives $2\beta =A\lambda$. The requested algebraic answers are therefore

There is a factor-of-two error in the PDF traction. Direct differentiation of the preceding velocity with the Newtonian fluid stress tensor givesrather than its printed coefficient $12\mu /a$. In particular the tangential traction is $6\mu \beta P\mathbf{U}/a$. Keeping the same definition of $\lambda$, the physically consistent translating surfactant-coated bubble instead has $\beta =A\lambda$ andThe two sets must not be silently conflated. As a useful check, the no-slip limit has the usual total Stokes flow drag $6\pi \mu aU$ with the corrected traction; the printed traction would double it.

Both versions give $A=-1/2$, $\alpha =-1/2$, $\beta =0$ when $\lambda \to 0$: the interface is tangentially stress-free and circulates as a clean inviscid bubble. For $\lambda \to \infty$, $A\to 0$, $\alpha \to -3/4$, $\beta \to -1/4$: the interface is immobile in the bubble frame and behaves as a no-slip sphere. The Marangoni stress remains finite because $\lambda A$ has a nonzero limit. The concentration smallness condition still has to hold; large $\lambda$ is not by itself a complete linearization criterion.

The normal component is balanced by the inner gas pressure and the normal capillary stress $\gamma \kappa$, including the variation of $\gamma$, together with the hydrostatic pressure difference responsible for buoyancy. A spatially uniform inner pressure alone cannot balance the dipolar traction. To make the normal stress balance on a translating bubble explicit, let $\Delta {\rho }_b$ be the outer-minus-inner mass density. After removing the equilibrium Laplace pressure, the corrected outer normal traction has dynamic part $-3\mu (1+\lambda )(\mathbf{U}\cdot \mathbf{n})/[a(1+2\lambda )]$. Its degree-one balance isThus, if a terminal speed is desired, $U=\Delta {\rho }_{b}g{a}^2(1+2\lambda )/[3\mu (1+3\lambda )]$, interpolating between the clean-bubble and rigid-sphere speeds. A degree-one shape displacement is merely a translation of the sphere, so the balance determines its rise speed, rather than a dipolar shape distortion.

Write $D/Dt={\partial }_t+\mathbf{u}\cdot \nabla$ for the material derivative and $q=\mathbf{u}\cdot \mathbf{B}$ for the cross-helicity density, so $H_c={\int }_{V}qdV$. The ideal magnetohydrodynamic induction equation of ideal magnetohydrodynamics, with $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{B}=0$, givesThe dot product of the Euler momentum equation with the magnetic field has no Lorentz force contribution, because $\mathbf{B}\cdot [(\nabla \times \mathbf{B})\times \mathbf{B}]=0$. Consequently,Here $h=e+p/\rho$ is the specific enthalpy, $T$ the temperature, and $s$ the specific entropy; $e$ is the internal energy per unit mass. The first law of thermodynamics in this convention is $de=Tds-pd(1/\rho )$, so $dh=Tds+dp/\rho$. Substitution, followed by $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{B}=0$, yields the cross-helicity conservation lawThe vector triple product identity $\mathbf{u}\times (\mathbf{u}\times \mathbf{B})=\mathbf{u}q-u^2\mathbf{B}$ puts this in the equivalent form

For the fixed volume, the divergence theorem gives the exact cross-helicity balanceThus cross-helicity is constant when the net source equals the outward flux. Simple sufficient hypotheses are $\mathbf{B}\cdot \nabla s=0$ throughout the volume and $\mathbf{u}\cdot \mathbf{n}=\mathbf{B}\cdot \mathbf{n}=0$ on its boundary. The first condition includes a homentropic flow; the second prevents both relevant boundary fluxes. Periodic boundary conditions, or sufficiently rapid decay at infinity, provide alternatives. These statements concern smooth ideal magnetohydrodynamics: material specific entropy conservation alone, $Ds/Dt=0$, does not eliminate spatial specific entropy gradients along the magnetic field lines.

Let $F(x,z,t)=z-\eta (x,t)$. The interface is a material surface for both fluids: its material derivative vanishes on $F=0$. With $u_j={\partial }_x{\varphi }_j$ and $w_j={\partial }_z{\varphi }_j$, this givesThus the kinematic boundary condition says that particles stay on the moving interface. The tangential velocities can differ; each side has its own material derivative. Replacing both derivatives by one background speed would be incorrect.

The dynamic boundary condition for an inviscid interface is pressure continuity, because the fluids have no viscous normal stress and there is no surface tension. The unsteady Bernoulli equation in each layer of irrotational flow readsEquating these pressures at $z=\eta$ gives the required dynamic boundary condition for an inviscid interface. Choose the potential gauges so that ${\rho }_1{C}_1={\rho }_2{C}_2$, or set both constants to zero relative to a common reference pressure. For example, ${\varphi }_j=U_{j}x-\frac{1}{2}{U}_j^{2}t+{\varphi }_j^{\prime }$ removes the distinct uniform-stream Bernoulli constants without changing either velocity. Material-interface kinematics and pressure continuity supply the two matching conditions, with the Bernoulli gauge understood.

An objective time derivative transforms as a physical tensor under a time-dependent rigid change of observer. If $x^{\ast }=Q(t)x+c(t)$, with $Q$ orthogonal and $A^{\ast }=QA{Q}^T$, objectivity requiresThis means the constitutive equation makes the same physical prediction in translating and rotating frames, rather than requiring individual tensor components to be invariant.

The printed plus commutator uses the derivative-index-first velocity gradient, $G_{ij}={\partial }_i{u}_j$. This is the transpose of the component-index-first convention $L_{ij}={\partial }_j{u}_i$ often used for the velocity gradient. In this notation $\omega =G-G^T$, and the rate is the Jaumann derivativeTo check the covariance of the Jaumann derivative, let $R=\dot{Q}{Q}^T$. Direct transformation givesThe observer-rotation terms cancel in the displayed corotational rate. Equivalently, in the $L$ convention the physical spin tensor is $W=(L-L^T)/2=-\omega /2$, and the same rate is $D_{t}A-WA+AW$. One must transpose the gradient and reverse the commutator together; using $L$ in the printed plus-sign expression would not be objective.

Another example is the upper-convected derivative, written consistently in the $L$ convention asThe extra terms in $L^{\ast }=QL{Q}^T+R$ cancel those in $D_t^{\ast }{A}^{\ast }$, so this also transforms covariantly. In contrast, the uncorrected material derivative $D_{t}A$ of a second-rank tensor is not objective: its transformation contains $R{A}^{\ast }-A^{\ast }R$. For instance a constant anisotropic tensor in a stationary fluid has zero material derivative in its original frame, but its components have a nonzero commutator derivative in a rotating observer's frame. The ordinary partial time derivative is likewise not an objective tensor rate.

The field $\varphi$ is a compositional order parameter in a binary fluid mixture. Its spatial integral is conserved in a closed sample, so advection and diffusion enter a continuity equation; the material derivative follows the incompressible fluid. The diffusive current $\mathbf{J}=-M\nabla \mu$, with positive order-parameter mobility $M$, moves material down the chemical potential gradient. The chemical potential of a composition field is the functional derivative of the symmetric quartic Landau free energyso $\mu =a\varphi +b{\varphi }^3-\kappa {\nabla }^2\varphi$. Positive $b,\kappa$ stabilize large amplitudes and penalize sharp interfaces; $a<0$ permits phase separation.

The momentum equation is the Navier-Stokes equation with dynamic viscosity $\eta$, constant mass density $\rho$, and the Korteweg force $-\varphi \nabla \mu$ arising from composition stresses. The pressure enforces incompressible flow, $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{v}=0$, and can absorb pure gradient contributions to that thermodynamic force. For example, $-\varphi \nabla \mu =\mu \nabla \varphi -\nabla (\varphi \mu )$ gives an equivalent force after redefining the pressure. These equations constitute deterministic Model H dynamics.

Their dissipative signs can be checked by the energy dissipation identity for Model H. Under periodic or no-flux, no-work boundary conditions, composition advection and capillary work cancel between $F$ and the kinetic energy, givingThus diffusion and viscosity dissipate energy, while the reversible advective coupling transfers it between composition and motion. Thermal noises are omitted at this deterministic hydrodynamic level.

For slow cooling of an astrophysical disk, let $t_{\mathrm{cool}}\gg {\Omega }^{-1}$ and assume a vertically symmetric laminar column with no significant radial mass exchange. Its vertical velocity is of order $H/t_{\mathrm{cool}}$, so the vertical material derivative of that velocity is of order $H/t_{\mathrm{cool}}^2$. Relative to gravity or pressure acceleration $\sim {\Omega }^{2}H$, the inertial correction is $O[(\Omega t_{\mathrm{cool}}{)}^{-2}]$.

The hydrostatic approximation therefore holds to leading order while the column slowly cools and contracts. Non-turbulent evolution removes the prescribed turbulent heating, but not the compressional work in the ideal gas energy equation:The continuity equation must still determine the slow vertical flow; $D_t$ is not generally ${\partial }_t$ at fixed height. This is a quasi-static approximation for a well-prepared, mechanically stable column, with fast free oscillations or growing convection excluded from the assumed slow solution.

At fixed cylindrical radius, let $w=u_z$ and use the continuity equation ${\partial }_t\rho +{\partial }_z(\rho w)=0$. For the similarity solution $z=\xi \eta (t)$ and $\rho =\tilde{\rho }(\xi )/\eta$, the continuity equation reduces toHere $\eta$ is dimensionless and $\xi$ labels the initial height. Midplane symmetry sets the integration constant to zero, so the flow is a homologous vertical motion of an astrophysical disk:The hydrostatic approximation and ideal gas law becomeThe material derivatives are $D_{t}P=\tilde{P}\dot{\eta }$ and $D_t\rho =-\tilde{\rho }\dot{\eta }/{\eta }^2$, so the energy equation givesSeparation of variables requires a positive constant $K$ such thatIntegrating with $\eta (0)=1$ gives the slow cooling of an astrophysical disk similarity factorA closed set of profile equations is thereforeThese have the same polytropic vertical structure in stellar gravity as part (b). Writingwith $P_0=\mathcal{R}{\rho }_0{T}_0$, fixesReturning to physical height, the explicit profiles and evolving semi-thickness for $|z|\le H(t)$ areandOutside this moving surface $\rho =P=0$. The surface density of a disk is conserved because $\rho dz=\tilde{\rho }d\xi$. The column cools and contracts without changing its scaled profile: its midplane temperature falls as ${\eta }^2$, its mass density rises as ${\eta }^{-1}$ and its pressure falls as $\eta$.

The value $T_0$ determines $H_0$, but the mass density normalization also enters $C$. If the initial column is specifically the heated equilibrium of part (b), switching off its heating givesOtherwise $P_0$, or equivalently the conserved column mass, is additional initial data. The contraction timescale grows with $1+Ct$, so sufficiently slow initial evolution remains slow relative to the fixed vertical dynamical timescale of a disk. This is an exact solution of the reduced hydrostatic approximation, rather than the full momentum equation: its omitted vertical acceleration is $\ddot{\eta }\xi$, with $\ddot{\eta }/(\eta {\Omega }^2)=2(1+\beta )C^2/[(1+2\beta {)}^2{\Omega }^2(1+Ct{)}^2]$, which remains small and decreases if $C\ll \Omega$.

The interface is material: fluid particles on $F=z-\eta (x,t)=0$ remain there. Its material derivative therefore vanishes, giving $w_j={\eta }_t+u_j{\eta }_x=D_j\eta /Dt$ on the interface. Since $w_j={\partial }_z{\varphi }_j$, this is the kinematic boundary condition for a free-surface graph on each side. The material derivatives use the respective tangential fluid velocities; they enforce the same moving normal boundary.

The Unsteady Bernoulli equation gives $p_j+{\rho }_j[{\partial }_t{\varphi }_j+|\nabla {\varphi }_j{|}^2/2+gz]=C_j(t)$. Absorb the spatially constant functions $C_j$ into the gauges of the velocity potentials. Evaluating at $z=\eta$ and subtracting the equations yields the stated dynamic boundary condition for an inviscid interface. Surface tension supplies the pressure jump, rather than pressure continuity. Thus the first condition enforces material motion, and the second enforces the Bernoulli pressure balance.

Use the paper's velocity gradient convention $A_{ij}={\partial }_i{v}_j$, so $\Omega =(A-A^T)/2$ and $D=(A+A^T)/2$. In a rigid motion there is rotation but no rate-of-strain tensor: $D=0$. A polar order parameter attached to the material must rotate exactly with it. In this convention its material derivative is $-\Omega \mathbf{p}$, and its corotational derivative of a polar vector must vanish.

Thus the compensating term is $+\Omega \mathbf{p}$ with coefficient exactly one. This follows from an objective time derivative and is independent of material properties. By contrast, the response to $D\mathbf{p}$ describes deformation and flow alignment of a polar order parameter; its coefficient $\xi$ can depend on the material. The transposed velocity gradient convention is essential to the sign of $\Omega$.

Let $D/Dt={\partial }_t+\mathbf{u}\cdot \nabla$ be the material derivative, and write $h$ for specific enthalpy. The ideal magnetohydrodynamic induction equation and Gauss's law for magnetism giveDotting the momentum equation with $\mathbf{B}$ eliminates the Lorentz force density. Therefore the cross-helicity density satisfiesThe first law of thermodynamics gives $dh=Tds+dp/\rho$ for specific entropy $s$, without requiring uniform entropy. ConsequentlySince $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{B}=0$, the first term on the right is a divergence. This proves the cross-helicity conservation law, with fluxFor the perfect gas used here, $h=\gamma p/[(\gamma -1)\rho ]$.

For uniform specific entropy, the material conservation of cross-helicity density criterion isThus the requested condition isIn the steady state, mass conservation gives $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{u}=-\mathbf{u}\cdot \nabla \log \rho$. An equivalent form, expressed entirely in the flow and thermodynamic variables, isIf “isentropic” means only constant specific entropy along individual trajectories, rather than a homentropic flow, the general criterion instead retains $T\mathbf{B}\cdot \nabla s$ on the right-hand side of the material derivative equation. The distinction matters because a source-free cross-helicity conservation law need not make $h_c$ constant along each trajectory.

The material derivative follows the interfacial surfactant. The term $-C{\nabla }_s\cdot {\mathbf{u}}_s$ describes dilution by tangential expansion and concentration by compression. The term $-C(\mathbf{u}\cdot \mathbf{n}){\nabla }_s\cdot \mathbf{n}$ accounts for changing surface area due to normal motion of a curved interface. Finally, $D_s{\nabla }_s^{2}C$ describes surface diffusion. Together these give conservation of insoluble surfactant on a moving interface.

The relevant surface Péclet number isWrite $S=\mathbf{n}\cdot \mathbf{A}\cdot \mathbf{n}$ and ${\mathbf{u}}_s=\mathbf{Ax}-S\mathbf{x}$. Since $\mathbf{A}$ has zero trace and ${\nabla }_s\mathbf{n}={\mathbf{I}}_s/a$, the surface divergence isThere is no normal motion. To first order in ${\mathrm{Pe}}_s$, the steady surfactant balance becomes $D_s{\nabla }_s^2{C}^{\prime }=C_0{\nabla }_s\cdot {\mathbf{u}}_s=-3C_{0}S$. The traceless quadratic $S$ is a degree-two spherical harmonic, so ${\nabla }_s^{2}S=-6S/a^2$. The mean of $C^{\prime }$ is zero by total surfactant conservation; consequentlyThe discarded advective term ${\mathbf{u}}_s\cdot {\nabla }_s{C}^{\prime }$ is smaller by ${\mathrm{Pe}}_s$. This is the quadrupolar surfactant distribution on a spherical interface.

With the unit normal directed from the bubble into the exterior, the interfacial stress balance with variable surface tension isUsing the specified first-order curvature and $\gamma ={\gamma }_0-K{\gamma }_{1}S$, together with ${\nabla }_{s}S=2{\mathbf{I}}_s\mathbf{An}/a$, givesThe first term is the spherical capillary pressure; the last contains the normal tension correction and the tangential Marangoni stress.

The ambient Stokes flow has the symmetry of the symmetric traceless tensor $\mathbf{E}$. In the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation, ${\chi }_{\infty }=\mathbf{x}\cdot \mathbf{E}\cdot \mathbf{x}/2$ is harmonic and yields $\mathbf{Ex}$. The decaying vector potential must have the form $\mathbf{E}\nabla (1/r)$, and the scalar disturbance must have the degree-two form $\mathbf{E}:\nabla \nabla (1/r)$. They are harmonic outside the bubble and have precisely the required rotational covariance. Dimensionless amplitudes may therefore be writtenFor a steady bubble, the no-penetration boundary condition gives $1+P-3Q=0$. Its tangential velocity gives $\alpha =1+2Q$. The tangential stress boundary condition then yieldsHence $\alpha =5/(5+2M)$, $Q=-M/(5+2M)$ and $P=-(5+5M)/(5+2M)$. The inviscid interior supplies only the constant pressure balancing $2{\gamma }_0/a$. Matching the remaining normal stress givesEliminating $P,Q,\alpha$ givesAs $M\to \infty$, $\alpha \to 0$: the Marangoni stress suppresses tangential motion and effectively immobilizes the interface. This limit must retain the small surface Péclet number and small-deformation assumptions; $M$ can grow through increasing ${\gamma }_1$ without invalidating the linear concentration approximation.