Put and . In the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation, take the harmonic potentials and . Differentiating gives the Stokeslet velocity and its pressure:
Indeed, writing ,
The antisymmetric first two terms cancel in the rate-of-strain tensor, whereas their curl supplies the vorticity. Thus
The rate-of-strain tensor has zero trace, as required by incompressibility. The stress is ; integrating its traction with normal over a sphere gives . This fixes the force normalization of the Stokeslet.
For a sphere in a uniform straining Stokes flow, write the ambient velocity as , where is symmetric and trace-free, and set . Symmetry gives zero translation and rotation of the centred force-free, torque-free sphere. Seek a decaying disturbance using the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation with
The components of are derivatives of , and is a trace-free harmonic quadrupole, so both potentials satisfy Laplace's equation outside the sphere. Direct differentiation yields
The no-slip boundary condition at requires the coefficient of to be and that of to vanish: , . Hence , , and
This disturbance cancels the ambient velocity at , decays at infinity, and has a leading stresslet proportional to .
For the two-sphere hydrodynamic interaction, let point from the forced sphere to the second sphere. The first sphere's leading far field is the Stokeslet with . Its incident rate-of-strain tensor at the second sphere is
The 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 from the second sphere its velocity is
The 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 gives
The factor makes explicit the velocity scale implicit in the printed remainder.
The resulting input power, equal to the viscous dissipation, is
It 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 becomes
Use the rotating sphere in Stokes flow at . The additional reflected rotlet gives
Adding 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.
For a Newtonian fluid, write , where is the rate-of-strain tensor. The Stokes equation without body force gives . Since the stress tensor is symmetric, its contraction with the antisymmetric part of the velocity gradient is zero. Thus
The divergence theorem proves the boundary-work identity
For an incompressible flow, , so 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 . Its contribution to the boundary work is , which vanishes because the particle is force-free and torque-free. The outer velocity is unchanged. Subtracting the two boundary-work identities therefore gives
To move this expression to the particle surface, apply the Lorentz reciprocal theorem to and in the punctured fluid domain. For completeness, its local proof is
On the outer boundary . Let be the particle-outward normal, opposite to the fluid-outward normal there. Integrating the preceding divergence identity gives
This 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, is symmetric and trace free, and . Symmetry gives zero rigid translation and rotation. Put and . Use the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation printed on the paper, with the decaying harmonic potentials
Their harmonicity follows from and from being a trace-free second derivative of . Direct differentiation gives
At , the no-slip boundary condition requires . Matching the independent and terms fixes and . The disturbance velocity and pressure are consequently
The pressure follows from . 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 is symmetric, confirming the assumed force-free and torque-free motion.
At the sphere , so the extra dissipation due to a rigid inclusion becomes . Contracting the supplied total stress tensor with cancels its terms proportional to , leaving . Thus
Using proves the single-sphere dissipation increase
One 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 .
The sphere number density is . Neglecting hydrodynamic interactions, the additional viscous dissipation per unit volume is . Adding the particle-free value gives
This is the Einstein viscosity formula for a dilute suspension, to first order in the particle volume fraction.
Use the Papkovich–Neuber representation in the convention
It gives and . Additive pressure constants are immaterial.
Let , with symmetric and traceless. The harmonic vector is a derivative of . The scalar is a decaying degree-two harmonic because is a harmonic homogeneous quadratic. These Papkovich potentials for a strained sphere have precisely the strain symmetry and decay required for the disturbance, so try
Substitution gives
At , require . The independent vector structures give and . The disturbance for a sphere in a uniform straining Stokes flow is
It decays at infinity and satisfies no slip exactly at the sphere. Its leading far field is a stresslet, of velocity scale .
A force-free sphere in a linear background translates with , by Faxén's first law, and a couple-free sphere rotates with the background rigid-body rotation , by Faxén's rotational law. Uniform translation and solid-body rotation can then be matched without disturbance. The remaining relative boundary velocity is exactly . The Linearity of Stokes flow and Uniqueness of Stokes flow therefore give the same disturbance. The pure strain produces no resultant force or couple, by its symmetric degree-two angular structure.
For an incompressible flow, write the Newtonian fluid stress tensor as , where is the rate-of-strain tensor. The Stokes equation gives . Symmetry of the Cauchy stress tensor therefore gives
Integrating and applying the divergence theorem expresses the viscous dissipation as boundary power:
At a moving rigid body, the surface velocity is . Its boundary-power contribution is , 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 gives
Apply the Lorentz reciprocal theorem to and in the fluid outside the inclusion. On the outer boundary , so
Writing 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 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 eliminates its torque. To derive the disturbance, put , and seek
The incompressible flow condition and Stokes equation reduce to
A decaying family satisfying these equations is , , . The no-slip boundary condition requires and , so and . Consequently
The total velocity is zero at , and the disturbance decays as . 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 . Contracting the supplied Newtonian fluid stress tensor with makes its two terms proportional to cancel, leaving . Hence the extra dissipation due to a rigid inclusion is
Here . 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 denotes the number of spheres per unit volume, . Thus
Add this to the particle-free viscous dissipation density . Comparing with gives the Einstein viscosity formula for a dilute suspension:
to first order in . The hydrodynamic interactions neglected here contribute beyond that dilute order.
Write and take to be the dynamic viscosity. The Papkovich–Neuber representation of a homogeneous Stokes flow uses a harmonic vector potential and harmonic scalar potential :
These formulas give incompressibility because , and give , the Stokes equation away from forcing.
For a point force represented by a Dirac delta distribution, rotational covariance and the Linearity of Stokes flow suggest a vector monopole proportional to : is a harmonic function outside the origin, and its slow decay gives the required nonzero resultant force. Take
Substitution gives the Stokeslet velocity and pressure:
The normalization follows from the Newtonian fluid stress tensor. Differentiating the velocity gives the rate of strain and vorticity of a Stokeslet:
Here . Thus . On a sphere enclosing the origin, its outward traction integrates to , so in the distributional sense. All displayed fields away from the point force have .
For a sphere in a uniform straining Stokes flow, centre the sphere at the origin and write the ambient velocity as , with and . Faxén's first law and Faxén's rotational law give zero translation and rotation. To impose the no-slip boundary condition, use the decaying harmonic dipole and quadrupole potentials
Trace freedom makes harmonic, and each component of is harmonic. The Papkovich–Neuber representation gives
At , the coefficient of must give , while the extra radial term must vanish. Hence and , giving the complete disturbance
The total velocity vanishes on the sphere and tends to the imposed strain at infinity. This field has no Stokeslet or rotlet contribution, consistent with a force-free, torque-free sphere. Its leading far field is the radial stresslet .
Now put the first sphere at and the second at , where , and let . The first sphere's leading disturbance is its Stokeslet. The rate-of-strain tensor and vorticity incident on the second sphere are
The second sphere translates with the local flow and rotates with half its local vorticity. Its force-free and torque-free conditions therefore remove any reflected force or torque monopole. The incident strain produces the stresslet just obtained. Since
its velocity at the first centre, using the relative vector , is
Faxén's first law then gives the self-mobility correction from a distant force-free sphere:
Finite-size terms and further reflections are beyond the leading order retained in this method of reflections for Stokes flow.
Only the imposed force does work, so the viscous dissipation is . With , define and . At fixed ,
so the leading change is negative when . The direction is held fixed in taking .
The fixed-force comparison of minimum viscous dissipation distinguishes the prescribed force from prescribed boundary velocity. Indeed,
and hence
At the actual reduced velocity, adding the second sphere increases the dissipation relative to an isolated translating sphere at that same velocity, exactly as required by the Minimum-dissipation theorem for Stokes flow. One can extend the two-sphere velocity rigidly into the second sphere, adding zero strain and producing an admissible trial field in the domain without it. The reflected angular velocity of the first sphere contributes only a higher-order squared rotational power to this comparison.
Finally hold the second sphere's angular velocity at zero. Faxén's rotational law requires the applied couple
The resulting rotlet adds at the first centre
This is the additional rotational constraint correction to sphere mobility. Including the strain reflection, the total leading change relative to the isolated velocity is
For motion parallel to the line of centres the constraint adds nothing at this order; for transverse motion it supplies an extra resisting correction.
Stresslet reflection between two force-free and forced spheres Created 2026-10-14 Updated 2026-10-25
Consider two widely separated rigid spheres of equal radius , with separation , in Stokes flow. Apply a force to the first sphere and let the second be force-free and torque-free. The second sphere samples the rate-of-strain tensor of the first sphere's Stokeslet, . Its leading disturbance is the stresslet of a sphere in a uniform straining Stokes flow. Evaluating that disturbance back at the first sphere gives
The hydrodynamic mobility matrix decreases at fixed force, consistently with the increase of resistance caused by an additional rigid inclusion.