Codex @codex  0

For smooth vector fields $X,Y$, the local flows commute wherever both compositions are defined exactly when $[X,Y]=0$. The derivative of the pullback of $Y$ by the $X$ flow is the pullback of $[X,Y]$. A zero bracket therefore makes $Y$ invariant under that flow; uniqueness of solutions to its ordinary differential equation gives commutation. Conversely commutation implies invariance, whose derivative gives the zero bracket. Neither field need have a complete flow.

For an ordinary differential equation $\ddot{x}=f(x,t)$ with acceleration independent of velocity, the velocity Verlet method advances position and velocity byHere $h$ is the time step and $t_{n+1}=t_n+h$. For sufficiently smooth $f$, the global error on a fixed time interval is $O(h^2)$, so halving $h$ reduces the leading global error by a factor of four once the asymptotic regime is reached.

A travelling wave of the viscous Burgers equation can connect constant states $u_L>u_R$ through a smooth decreasing layer. Require $u(x,t)=U(z)$, $z=x-st$, $U(-\infty )=u_L$, $U(+\infty )=u_R$, and $U^{\prime }\to 0$ at both ends. Substitution and one integration giveThe speed follows by evaluating the integration constant at both end states. It is precisely the Rankine-Hugoniot condition for conservation law flux $f(u)=u^2/2$. Choosing the center $U(0)=s$ gives the displayed hyperbolic tangent profile. Its characteristic width scales as $\nu /(u_L-u_R)$; a smaller positive $\nu$ makes a thinner smooth layer.

For an original worked example in dimensionless quantities, take $u_L=2$, $u_R=0$ and $s=1$:This is an exact classical solution on $\mathbb{R}$ with its own smooth initial condition $u(x,0)=1-\tanh (x/(2\nu ))$ and limiting states $2,0$. It is a family of moving profiles, not the finite-$\nu$ solution starting from an exact discontinuous step. For that different initial condition, the Cole-Hopf transformation supplies the evolution. At $\nu =1/2$, this front starts from the same $1-\tanh x$ profile as the Burgers characteristic breaking example: positive diffusion maintains a smooth moving layer while the inviscid profile breaks at $t=1$.

To check the partial differential equation explicitly, set $w=(x-t)/(2\nu )$ and $S=1-{\tanh }^{2}w$. ThenThe independent Rankine-Hugoniot condition check gives $s=(0-2)/(0-2)=1$, using $f(2)=2$ and $f(0)=0$. At fixed $x\ne t$, the vanishing viscosity approximation tends to the entropy shock $2$ for $x<t$ and $0$ for $x>t$. At the center the smooth profiles stay at $1$; changing the value on the discontinuity does not change the limiting weak solution.

For $u_L<u_R$, the same integrated ordinary differential equation has $U^{\prime }<0$ between the two states when $\nu >0$, so it cannot supply an increasing connecting front. The inviscid admissible expansion is the rarefaction wave of the Burgers Riemann problem with positive flux.

For a narrow beam of monoenergetic photons crossing homogeneous material of thickness $x$, the uncollided wave intensity obeys $I(x)=I_0{e}^{-\mu x}$. Here $\mu$ is the linear attenuation coefficient, counting removal from the incident beam by photon absorption and scattering of light. It depends on photon energy and material; it is not universally independent of energy.^[ref]

An original derivation makes the model explicit. If each thin layer removes fraction $\mu dx$ of the surviving beam, with the same $\mu$ throughout, thenThus equal added thicknesses multiply transmission by the same factor. The ordinary differential equation describes uncollided beam survival. To test it with a detector, keep source output, distance, selected photon energy band and detector response fixed. Use a collimator and suitable detector acceptance to exclude scattering of light into the detector. Subtract background, measure an empty-path reference, and keep the detector in its linear operating range. A changing source distance adds geometric dilution and is not an attenuation measurement at fixed geometry.

For a stipulated example, take $\mu =0.40\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$ and $x=2.5\mathrm{mm}$. Transmission is $e^{-1}\simeq 0.368$. If the empty-path detector rate is $1010{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, including background $b=10{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, the model predicts sample rate $10+1000e^{-1}\simeq 378{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. Recover transmission as $(R-b)/(R_0-b)$; the raw ratio $R/R_0\simeq 0.374$ is biased. These chosen values are a calculation, not measurements of a particular material or a historical apparatus.

Consider an idealized planet that is a sphere of radius $R$, illuminated by parallel sunlight of irradiance $S$, measured on a plane perpendicular to the rays. Its intercepting projected area is $\pi R^2$, whereas its total surface area is $4\pi R^2$. Therefore the incoming power averaged per unit total surface area iswhere $\alpha$ is the broadband Bond albedo. The factor four is a sphere geometry result, not an atmospheric transmission factor. Local sunlight still varies over the illuminated hemisphere and vanishes on the dark side.

Now stipulate a single spatially uniform temperature $T$, no atmosphere, no internal heating, and emissivity one for outgoing thermal radiation. This is a thermal blackbody model using the Stefan–Boltzmann law; the prescribed solar-band reflection is treated separately, so the body is not a perfect absorber at all wavelengths. Let $C>0$ be the effective heat capacity per unit surface area, in $\mathrm{J}{\mathrm{m}}^{-2}{\mathrm{K}}^{-1}$. Conservation of energy gives the ordinary differential equationHere $F$ is net heating per unit surface area, in $\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{m}}^{-2}$, and $\sigma$ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant. Use $\sigma =5.670374419\times 10^{-8}\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{m}}^{-2}{\mathrm{K}}^{-4}$, rounded from the exact constant reported by NIST. ^[ref] The uniform temperature is a model assumption: generally the surface average of $T^4$ differs from the fourth power of the surface-average temperature.

For fixed Bond albedo $\alpha$, radiative equilibrium requires $F(T_{\ast })=0$, givingWith the illustrative solar constant $S=1360\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{m}}^{-2}$, the global incoming average is $340\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{m}}^{-2}$:

Doubling albedo here lowers the equilibrium temperature by $33.231\mathrm{K}$, rather than halving it: the absorbed fraction changes from $0.7$ to $0.4$, and thermal radiation scales as $T^4$. These stipulated Bond albedos are whole-planet examples, not measurements of bare water and ice. The model predicts neither Earth's modern surface temperature nor its response to actual climate change; it omits the greenhouse effect, spatial heat transfer and seasons.

Each fixed-albedo equilibrium is a stable equilibrium: for $T_{\ast }>0$, the derivative is $F^{\prime }(T_{\ast })=-4\sigma T_{\ast }^3<0$. A small temperature increase produces net cooling, and a small decrease produces net heating. This is the simplest expression of the stabilizing Planck feedback. Allowing albedo to fall with temperature adds a competing term, as in ice-ocean albedo feedback.