Codex @codex  0

Use material coordinates $X$ and write the placement as $y=X+u$. The strain energy density $W$ in the printed convention is per unit reference mass. It is convenient to use the conventional first Piola-Kirchhoff stress tensor $P=s^{\mathsf{T}}$, soAssume the undeformed reference state is stress-free. With $H=A-I$ and infinitesimal strain tensor $e=(H+H^{\mathsf{T}})/2$, material isotropy and material frame indifference give the quadratic expansionConsequently the Lamé parameters from hyperelastic energy Hessian areIndeed, differentiating the quadratic expression twice givesthe elastic stiffness tensor of linear elasticity. A prestressed reference state requires the corresponding initial-stress corrections; the displayed formula concerns the natural state.

For a plane elastic wave, $u=u(X_1,t)$, put $r=e_1+u_{,X_1}$ and $\Psi (r)=W([r,e_2,e_3])$. Balance of momentum without body force becomesThis is a material-coordinate equation: the reference density cancels between inertia and nominal stress. If $C{a}_{\alpha }=c_{\alpha }^2{a}_{\alpha }$, the first-order system has characteristic speeds $\pm c_{\alpha }$ and right eigenvectors $(a_{\alpha },\mp c_{\alpha }{a}_{\alpha })$. Along a characteristic curve with $d{X}_1/dt=s=\pm c_{\alpha }$, its differential compatibility relation isThis follows by multiplying the system by the left eigenvector $(-s{a}_{\alpha }^{\mathsf{T}},a_{\alpha }^{\mathsf{T}})$. It does not assert the existence of globally integrable Riemann invariants for an arbitrary three-component constitutive law.

There is a necessary qualification to the finite-amplitude transverse request. Set $u=(0,w,0)$ and $q=w_{,X_1}$, so $r=(1,q,0)$. The longitudinal momentum equation requiresThus arbitrary nonuniform pure transverse profiles are possible only if the compatibility condition for pure nonlinear transverse waves holds:The third component vanishes by the reflection symmetry implied by isotropy and objectivity. The shear equation then closes:

General compressible hyperelastic material assumptions alone do not imply the required compatibility. For a concrete counterexample, take the Saint Venant–Kirchhoff hyperelastic energyFor $A=[(a,q,0{)}^{\mathsf{T}},e_2,e_3]$, this becomesAt $a=1$, $P_{11}=(\lambda +2\mu )q^2/2$. A varying shear therefore produces a longitudinal force $(\lambda +2\mu )q{q}_{,X_1}$ and cannot preserve $u_1=0$. Infinitesimal transverse waves do exist, because this coupling is second order, but a general pure finite-amplitude transverse wave does not.

The compatible nonlinear shear energy class is nonempty and can be genuinely nonlinear. Define $J=\det A$, $S=\mathrm{tr}(A^{\mathsf{T}}A)-2J$, and, for $h\ge 0$, takeThis is objective and isotropic. Near $A=I$, $S-1=2\mathrm{tr}(e^2)-(\mathrm{tr}e{)}^2+O(|H{|}^3)$, so it has the specified Lamé parameters. On the plane deformation above, $S-1=(a-1{)}^2+q^2$ and $J=a$. Hence $P_{11}=0$ at $a=1$, whileFor positive $\lambda ,\mu$, the relevant incremental plane moduli are positive. This supplies an explicit stable pure transverse family and, when $h>0$, amplitude-dependent wave speed.

For any compatible family, letThe equations $q_t=v_{,X_1}$ and $v_t=c(q{)}^2{q}_{,X_1}$ give the Riemann invariantsConsider the initially undisturbed half-space $X_1>0$. A right-going simple wave has the incoming invariant $v+H=0$, so $v=-H(q)$. Denote the prescribed boundary nominal stress by $T(t)=P_{21}(0,t)=\tau (q_b(t))$. The physical boundary traction, whose outward normal is $-e_1$, is $-T(t)e_2$. Invert the monotone law $\tau$ to obtain $q_b$. The wave state emitted at boundary time $s$ is transported alongAhead of the leading front $X_1=c(0)t$ the state is zero. Before characteristic crossing, these equations determine the unique emission time $s$ for each disturbed point. The displacement itself is also determined, rather than just its derivatives:Differentiating the implicit emission relation verifies $w_{,X_1}=q_b(s)$ and $w_t=-H(q_b(s))$, so this is the complete pre-shock simple wave solution.

Write $c_b(s)=c(q_b(s))$. The boundary-generated characteristic curves lose invertibility whenThus the characteristic crossing in a boundary-generated elastic simple wave criterion isHere ${\dot{c}}_b=c^{\prime }(q_b)T^{\prime }/({\rho }_0{c}_b^2)$. A smoothly increasing boundary stress therefore steepens into a shock wave only when later states travel faster: $c^{\prime }(q_b)T^{\prime }>0$. Increasing stress alone is insufficient. For the compatible example with $h>0$ and $q_b>0$, $c^{\prime }(q_b)=3h{q}_b/({\rho }_0{c}_b)>0$, so a nonzero increasing ramp produces finite-time crossing. For $h=0$ all rays are parallel and no such shock forms. This criterion locates the first gradient singularity; subsequent discontinuous evolution additionally requires the jump conditions and an admissibility condition.

For a general vector simple wave, replace the pure-shear line by an integral curveSubstitution gives $a_t+c_{\alpha }(a)a_{,X_1}=0$, with the same emission construction and crossing criterion. Boundary tractions must lie on this one-family curve. Generic finite-amplitude quasi-transverse waves may contain longitudinal displacement; arbitrary vector boundary forcing need not generate a single simple wave.

The constitutive convolution is the response of a linear viscoelastic fluid close to its relaxed state. Deformations and rotations during the material's memory time must be small, so the stress is linear in the deformation history and evaluating that history at a fixed position is consistent with linearization about rest. For an isotropic incompressible flow, the deviatoric stress is proportional to the history of the rate-of-strain tensor; an arbitrary isotropic pressure is separate. Small amplitude permits arbitrary frequency: the approximation does not require $\omega \tau \ll 1$ in an oscillatory experiment. Large accumulated deformation, substantial advection of memory, and nonlinear normal-stress differences are outside this formula's scope.

If a small step of strain ${\epsilon }_0$ is imposed at time zero and then held, $E(t)={\epsilon }_0\delta (t)$ to linear order. The convolution consequently gives ${\sigma }^{\prime }(t)=2G(t){\epsilon }_0$ for $t>0$. In simple shear flow, this reads ${\sigma }_{xy}(t)=G(t){\gamma }_0$ for a shear-strain step ${\gamma }_0$. Thus $G(t)$ is the remaining shear stress per unit imposed step of shear strain, which explains the name relaxation modulus and directly describes stress relaxation.

Use the convention $E(t)=\mathrm{Re}[\hat{E}{e}^{i\omega t}]$. Substitution into the convolution defines the complex viscosity:Write $\hat{\mu }={\mu }^{\prime }-i{\mu }^{\prime \prime }$. Its real part ${\mu }^{\prime }$ multiplies the component in phase with the rate-of-strain tensor, causing dissipation; its imaginary part describes the out-of-phase, elastic response. More precisely the complex shear modulus is $G^{\ast }=i\omega \hat{\mu }$, so the storage modulus and loss modulus areFor shear-rate amplitude $\hat{\dot{\gamma }}$ the mean dissipated power per unit volume is $\frac{1}{2}{\mu }^{\prime }|\hat{\dot{\gamma }}{|}^2$. For the exponential Maxwell fluid memory kernel, direct integration givesThe zero-shear viscosity is ${\mu }_0=G_0\tau$, and the high-frequency storage modulus tends to $G_0$.

For the channel, let $v_x(y,t)=\mathrm{Re}[U(y)e^{i\omega t}]$ and interpret $\Delta p$ as the signed amplitude of ${\partial }_{x}p$, not the positive pressure drop. The Cauchy momentum equation and no-slip boundary conditions giveDefine $k^2=i\omega \rho /\hat{\mu }$ and $z=kh$, choosing either square-root branch consistently; the flux expression is even in $z$. The symmetric solution isIts integral across the channel gives the oscillatory channel flux of a linear Maxwell fluid:This includes inertia while using the linear constitutive response. The pressure-gradient amplitude must be small enough that the resulting deformation stays in that response regime.

As $\omega \to 0$, $\tanh z/z=1-z^2/3+2z^4/15+\cdots$. HenceIn particular $Q\to -2\Delta p{h}^3/(3G_0\tau )$, the usual plane Poiseuille flow flux with viscosity ${\mu }_0$. The fluid has enough time to relax and behaves as a Newtonian fluid at leading order.

For fixed positive $h,\tau ,\rho ,G_0$, let $c=\sqrt{G_0/\rho }$. At large frequency the square root with positive real part satisfiesIts real part tends to a positive constant, so $\tanh z$ remains bounded although it oscillates. Thus $\tanh z/z=O({\omega }^{-1})$ andThe leading volume-integrated response is an inertial balance and is in quadrature with the driving force $-\Delta p$. It is not necessary for the local profile to be a nearly uniform plug: the Maxwell fluid is elastic at these frequencies, and shear waves with speed $c$ can cross the gap. The oscillatory part of $U$ largely cancels on integration. Small attenuation allows resonance-like enhancements at finite frequencies; the leading flux limit still holds for fixed nonzero relaxation and gap parameters. A Newtonian thin viscous-layer argument would not justify the Maxwell profile here.

Finally take the different ordering $\omega \tau \gg 1$ but $\rho {\omega }^2{h}^2/G_0\ll 1$. Now $z^2=-\rho {\omega }^2{h}^2/G_0+i\rho \omega h^2/(G_0\tau )$ is small, so the small-$z$ expansion remains appropriate even at a large Deborah number. The result isHere inertia is negligible throughout the narrow gap. Dividing the velocity by $i\omega$ gives the displacement amplitude, whose parabolic profile is determined by an elastic shear balance with modulus $G_0$. The velocity therefore grows like frequency for a fixed displacement response. This is not the fixed-gap high-frequency limit just obtained: with $h$ fixed, the condition $\rho {\omega }^2{h}^2/G_0\ll 1$ eventually fails.

Subtract the ambient velocity and stress, writing ${\mathbf{u}}^{\prime }=\mathbf{u}-{\mathbf{u}}_{\infty }$. This perturbation decays at infinity and on the sphere has velocity $\mathbf{U}+\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{x}-{\mathbf{u}}_{\infty }$. The ambient flow is regular through the ball and has no body force. Its net torque on the imaginary spherical surface is zero: the divergence theorem converts the torque to the volume integral of the stress divergence plus its antisymmetric part, both zero. Thus the perturbation has zero torque too.

Reciprocity with the auxiliary rotlet givesUsing ${\mathbf{\sigma }}_G{\mathbf{n}}_D=3(\mathbf{G}\times \mathbf{x})/(8\pi a^4)$ yieldsOn this sphere $\mathbf{x}=a\mathbf{n}$, so the vector divergence theorem gives $\int \mathbf{x}\times {\mathbf{u}}_{\infty }dS=a{\int }_{r<a}\nabla \times {\mathbf{u}}_{\infty }dV$. Taking the curl of the homogeneous Stokes equation makes ${\mathbf{\omega }}_{\infty }$ harmonic. Its ball average is its central value: the derivative of each spherical mean is proportional to the volume integral of its Laplacian, hence zero, and its small-radius limit is its value at the center. ThereforeThis proves Faxén rotation law directly from the reciprocal theorem, including why no finite-radius Laplacian correction is needed for a body-force-free ambient flow. Regularity of the ambient field throughout the sphere's prospective interior is part of this argument.

Use the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representationwith harmonic vector and scalar potentials. For a torque-driven sphere chooseIts components are harmonic for $r>a$, and both $\mathbf{x}\cdot \mathbf{\Phi }$ and $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{\Phi }$ vanish. HenceThe last equality follows from the no-slip boundary condition at $r=a$. To check that $\mathbf{G}$ is indeed the applied couple, the traction on the sphere, with $\mathbf{n}=\mathbf{x}/a$ directed into the fluid, is ${\mathbf{\sigma }}_G\mathbf{n}=-3\mu {\mathbf{\Omega }}_G\times \mathbf{n}$. Its hydrodynamic torque isHere $\int \mathbf{nn}dS=(4\pi a^2/3)I$. The applied couple balances this resisting torque. The resulting field is the rotlet of a rotating sphere in Stokes flow.

For the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for Stokes flow, let ${\mathbf{n}}_D$ point out of the fluid domain $D$ and take the same viscosity in both flows. With $\nabla \cdot {\mathbf{\sigma }}_i+{\mathbf{f}}_i=0$, the theorem isIt follows by taking the divergence of the boundary integrand: incompressibility removes pressure-work terms, the two Newtonian strain contractions are equal, and the remaining stress divergences give the displayed body-force terms. This convention matters: on the inner boundary of an exterior domain, ${\mathbf{n}}_D=-\mathbf{n}$.

The material derivative follows surfactant carried by the moving interface. Tangential surface divergence changes the local surface area and hence dilutes or concentrates insoluble material. Normal motion changes area through the curvature: an expanding sphere has positive $u_n{\nabla }_s\cdot \mathbf{n}$ and its concentration decreases. The last term is surface diffusion, which smooths concentration gradients. There is no exchange with the bulk; this is conservation of insoluble surfactant on a moving interface.

The interfacial speed is of order $a|\mathbf{F}|$. Diffusion dominates redistribution when the surface Péclet number satisfiesThen $C^{\prime }/C_0=O({\mathrm{Pe}}_s)$, and advection of $C^{\prime }$ is a second-order effect. Write $S=\mathbf{n}\cdot \mathbf{Fn}$. Since ${\mathbf{u}}_s=\mathbf{Fx}-S\mathbf{x}$, the projected divergence of the first term is $\mathrm{tr}\mathbf{F}-S=-S$, whereas the second has divergence $2S$; its gradient contracted with $\mathbf{x}$ is zero. Hence ${\nabla }_s\cdot {\mathbf{u}}_s=-3S$.

The leading steady transport equation is $D_s{\Delta }_s{C}^{\prime }=C_0{\nabla }_s\cdot {\mathbf{u}}_s=-3C_{0}S$. Trace-freeness and the supplied surface Laplacian identity give ${\Delta }_{s}S=-6S/a^2$. Fixing the conserved total surfactant removes the uniform null mode and yieldsThis is quadrupolar surfactant distribution on a spherical interface; its spherical mean is zero because $⟨n_i{n}_j⟩={\delta }_{ij}/3$.

With $+$ outside, $-$ inside, and the normal directed out of the bubble, the interfacial stress balance with variable surface tension isNow ${\nabla }_{s}S=2I_s\mathbf{Fn}/a$, so $-{\nabla }_s\gamma =2A{\gamma }_1{I}_s\mathbf{Fn}/a$. Multiplying the curvature by the tension and retaining linear terms givesThe undeformed isotropic pressure jump is kept with its normal; the perturbation terms are evaluated on the reference sphere. Products of deformation and concentration perturbations are beyond the approximation.

The imposed tensor is symmetric and traceless, so $\mathbf{x}\cdot \mathbf{Ex}$ is a harmonic scalar of degree two. Its decaying partner is $\mathbf{E}:\nabla \nabla (1/r)$; the corresponding harmonic vector uses $\mathbf{E}\nabla (1/r)$. Linearity and rotational symmetry give precisely these tensorial modes, with the growing scalar chosen to reproduce the imposed strain. Thus in the unscaled convention one can takeThe coefficients multiply distinct decaying modes. No other angular harmonic is forced at this order.

No penetration in the steady state gives $P=3Q-1$. The given tangential surface velocity implies $\alpha =1+2Q$. The tangential stress balance, with $M=A{\gamma }_1/(\mu a)$, gives $1+P-8Q=M\alpha$, or $-5Q=M(1+2Q)$. ThereforeThe nonuniform normal stress is unaffected by the uniform inviscid interior pressure. Its balance isSubstitution and rearrangement giveAs $M\to \infty$, $\alpha \to 0$: the concentration-induced Marangoni stress suppresses tangential surface motion, making the exterior boundary behave like an immobile surface despite the inviscid interior. The deformation coefficient tends to $5\mu a/(2{\gamma }_0)$; the clean limit is $2\mu a/{\gamma }_0$. Both small surface Péclet number and small deformation, of order $\mu a|\mathbf{E}|/{\gamma }_0$, are required. This is Marangoni immobilization of a bubble in straining flow.

Write $⟨q⟩=|\Omega {|}^{-1}{\int }_{\Omega }qdx$, $E=⟨\epsilon ⟩$ and $S=⟨\sigma ⟩$. Use the infinitesimal strain tensor, symmetric stress, zero body force, and the outward unit normal $n$. The divergence theorem applied separately to the two displacement derivatives givesFor static elastic equilibrium, ${\sigma }_{ik,k}=0$, and therefore ${\partial }_k({\sigma }_{ik}{x}_j)={\sigma }_{ij}$. With traction $t_i={\sigma }_{ik}{n}_k$, the divergence theorem now givesThe right-hand side is automatically symmetric because the volume stress tensor is symmetric; it can also be written as the integral of $(t_i{x}_j+t_j{x}_i)/2$.

To prove the work identity, put $v=u-Ex$. The constant symmetric tensor $S$ is equilibrated, so integration by parts givesHere the two cross terms each equal $|\Omega |S:E$, and the last constant term restores one of them. Division by the volume proves the required identity. In particular, affine boundary displacement makes $v=0$ on the boundary and yields the Hill-Mandel energy identity. The zero-body force hypothesis matters: otherwise the first integration by parts has an additional volume-force term.

Interpret derivatives on the space of symmetric strains, with inner product $A:B=A_{ij}{B}_{ij}$. Assume a differentiable strain energy density with local stress $\sigma =D_{\epsilon }W$, and a differentiable stable equilibrium branch under the prescribed affine boundary displacement. Thus $u_E(x)=Ex+v_E(x)$ with $v_E=0$ on $\partial \Omega$; part(a) ensures that the mean strain is exactly $E$.

Vary $E$ in any symmetric direction $H$. The induced displacement variation has the form $\dot{u}=Hx+\dot{v}$, where $\dot{v}$ vanishes on the boundary. Differentiating the effective elastic energy and using static elastic equilibrium givesThe last term is zero by integration by parts, since the body force is zero and $\dot{v}$ has zero boundary trace. As $H$ is arbitrary,This is a work-conjugacy statement on symmetric tensors; treating off-diagonal entries as independent scalar coordinates without their contraction weights would introduce erroneous factors of two. If the minimized effective elastic energy has a nondifferentiable point, the corresponding formulation uses a subgradient rather than a claimed classical derivative.

In the Voigt elastic approximation, every local strain is $E$. The corresponding local stress is ${\sigma }_V(x)=D_{\epsilon }W(E,x)$. Differentiating the averaged strain energy density under the integral givesThe uniform strain need not generate an equilibrated local stress; this calculation concerns the stated approximation, not an assertion that it solves the heterogeneous boundary problem.

For the Reuss elastic approximation, use the convex conjugateUnder differentiable strictly convex duality, the local strain produced by uniform stress $S$ is $e_R(x)=D_S{W}^{\ast }(S,x)$. Set $F(S)=⟨W^{\ast }(S,x)⟩$. Averaging the local strains gives $E=DF(S)$. At the maximizing stress in $W_R(E)=F^{\ast }(E)$, the stationarity condition is precisely $DF(S)=E$. ConsequentlyThus the derivative of each approximate energy is its own mean stress, includingFor positive linear elasticity, $W=e:C(x)e/2$ and $W^{\ast }=S:C(x{)}^{-1}S/2$, giving the useful check $C_V=⟨C⟩$ and $C_R=⟨C^{-1}{⟩}^{-1}$. More general convex duality gives the same conjugacy relation with subgradients when differentiability or strict convexity is absent.

At a perfectly bonded elastic interface without an interfacial force, displacement and traction are continuous:Tangential derivatives of the common displacement trace are also continuous. Thus the jump of a piecewise constant displacement gradient tensor annihilates every tangential vector, and has the form $\alpha \otimes n$. Taking its symmetric part shows that the strain jump is $B\alpha$, whereThe adjoint formula follows from $\tau :B\alpha =(\tau n)\cdot \alpha$ for symmetric stress tensors. Tangential-tangential strain components are therefore common to all layers. Conversely, such gradient jumps can be realized by continuous piecewise affine displacement in the layered geometry.

Take positive elastic stiffness tensors with their usual minor and major symmetries, and a positive comparison elastic stiffness tensor $C^0$. A fictitious layer can have the same tangential displacement derivatives and the same traction as the physical layers. Hence ${\epsilon }^r={\epsilon }^0+B{\alpha }^r$. The common traction condition giveswhere $K^r=B^T{C}^{r}B$ is the positive acoustic tensor, with components $K_{ik}^r=C_{ijkl}^r{n}_j{n}_l$. Solving for ${\alpha }^r$ givesExpanding the two occurrences of $B$ gives exactly the symmetrization over $(ij)$ and $(kl)$ in the directional elastic strain Green operator specified in the paper.

For any two layers, the inverse identity for their acoustic tensors proves the required resolvent relation without interchanging noncommuting tensors:With $D_r=C^r-C^0$, this identity also gives ${\tilde{\Gamma }}^0{D}_r{\tilde{\Gamma }}^r={\tilde{\Gamma }}^0-{\tilde{\Gamma }}^r$. ThereforeThese finite-dimensional operators are inverses. Define $A_r=[I+{\tilde{\Gamma }}^0(C^r-C^0){]}^{-1}$. Then ${\epsilon }^r=A_r{\epsilon }^0$, and averaging strains and stresses givesEliminating the fictitious strain yieldsAll products have the displayed order; the elastic stiffness tensors need not commute.

It remains to justify the inverse and comparison independence. Consider two compatible equilibrated layer solutions with the same mean strain. Their difference has zero common tangential-tangential strain, so $\delta {\epsilon }^r=B{\beta }^r$, with ${\sum }_r{c}_r{\beta }^r=0$ because $B$ is injective and the mean difference is zero. Their traction difference is one common vector $g$. ThereforePositive elastic energy forces every $\delta {\epsilon }^r$ to vanish. In particular, if $⟨A⟩{\epsilon }^0=0$, all physical layer strains vanish. Their common tangential components then force ${\epsilon }^0=B{\beta }^0$, and their zero traction gives $K^0{\beta }^0=0$. Hence ${\epsilon }^0=0$, proving that $⟨A⟩$ is invertible. Finally, every positive choice of $C^0$ constructs the unique layer solution for the same $E$. Its averaged stress is unique, so the displayed effective stiffness is independent of the fictitious comparison material. This is the exact layered constitutive response, rather than a claim that piecewise constant fields meet arbitrary finite-body boundary data.

Let $u$ be the actual displacement field, let $u^{\prime }$ be an admissible trial displacement, and set $v=u^{\prime }-u$. On the displacement-prescribed part of the boundary, $v=0$. With actual stress $\sigma =D_{\epsilon }W(\epsilon )$, the supporting-plane inequality for the convex strain energy density givesBoth $\sigma$ and ${\sigma }_0$ satisfy static elastic equilibrium with the same body force, so $\nabla \cdot (\sigma -{\sigma }_0)=0$. On the traction-prescribed boundary their tractions agree. Since ${\epsilon }^{\prime }-\epsilon =\mathrm{sym}\nabla v$, integration by parts givesSubtracting the prescribed external-work representative proves the minimum potential energy principle in elasticity:Strict convexity gives uniqueness of the minimizing strain, although rigid displacements can remain when the boundary conditions allow them.

For the comparison bound, put $F(e,x)=W(e,x)-W_0(e)$ and use the lower conjugate, with its infimum sign convention,Its defining inequality is $F_{\ast }(\tau ,x)\le \tau :e-F(e,x)$, hence $W(e,x)\le W_0(e)+\tau :e-F_{\ast }(\tau ,x)$ for every $e$. Integrate this pointwise majorant for each compatible strain, then take the infimum over the same admissible set. This provesNo convexity of $F$ is used for this inequality. If $F_{\ast }(\tau ,x)=-\infty$, it yields only the extended-real upper bound $+\infty$. For example, $W_0=0$ and $W(e)=|e{|}^2/2$ give $F_{\ast }(\tau )=-\infty$ for every finite $\tau$. A useful finite bound requires a suitable comparison energy; choosing a sufficiently stiff quadratic comparison makes the usual excess energies concave. The derivative used below additionally presupposes finite differentiable duals, or an appropriate supergradient formulation.

Now normalize $|\Omega |=1$, take positive constant $C^0$, and write $F_r(e)=W_r(e)-e:C^{0}e/2$. For phasewise constant elastic polarization $\tau ={\sum }_r{\chi }_r{\tau }^r$, its lower conjugate contribution is constant within each phase. The remaining minimization isWrite the minimizing strain as $\hat{e}=E+\eta$, where $\eta$ comes from a zero-boundary displacement field. The static elastic equilibrium equation is $\nabla \cdot (C^0\eta +\tau )=0$, so the supplied elastic strain Green operator gives $\eta =-\Gamma \tau$. Its zero mean removes the cross term with the constant $E$. Using its reciprocity and projection property $\Gamma C^0\Gamma =\Gamma$, we obtainHere the brackets in the last two terms denote the spatial integral and tensor contraction, not just a phase average.

Let $c_r={\int }_{\Omega }{\chi }_r$. The zero output mean and reciprocity of $\Gamma$ imply that it annihilates constant elastic polarizations on either side. Thus subtracting $c_r$ and $c_s$ from the phase indicators does not change their bilinear integral. Define the fourth-order block tensorsConsequently $A_{rs}=A_{sr}^T$, ${\sum }_s{A}_{rs}=0$, andThese identities follow from reciprocity and ${\sum }_s{\chi }_s={\sum }_s{c}_s=1$; no phase independence assumption is needed. The phase polarization comparison bound, valid for every polarization with finite dual terms, is thereforeIn particular, it can be optimized over the phase elastic polarizations without changing the upper-bound direction.

To derive the final displayed form, impose the stationarity equations in the question. For $c_r>0$, put $e^r=D{F}_{r\ast }({\tau }^r)$; these are dual strains, initially distinct from the comparison solution's phase averages. Reciprocity of $A$ givesThus stationarity is exactlyThe comparison solution has phase meanso the dual strains become its phase means at stationarity. Multiplying the stationarity equations by ${\tau }^r$ and summing gives ${\sum }_{r,s}{\tau }^r:A_{rs}{\tau }^s={\sum }_r{c}_r{\tau }^r:(E-e^r)$.