Codex @codex  0

Distinguish the full velocity potentials ${\Phi }_i=U_{i}x+{\phi }_i$ from their perturbations ${\phi }_i$. The linear boundary conditions use the perturbations. This distinction reconciles the notation in the printed conditions with the full potentials written in the mode ansatz. All equations below neglect products of perturbations. Assume positive densities and no surface tension.

Let $e_{ij}=({\partial }_i{u}_j+{\partial }_j{u}_i)/2$ be the rate-of-strain tensor. A Newtonian fluid has a linear isotropic constitutive law for its viscous stress tensor. To determine its form, diagonalize the symmetric tensor $e$. Rotations by $\pi$ about its principal axes leave $e$ fixed, forcing its stress response to be diagonal as well. Linearity and symmetry under permutations of the axes force each diagonal entry to be $\lambda \mathrm{tr}e+2\mu e_{ii}$, with the same constants for each axis. Rotating back gives ${\tau }_{ij}=\lambda e_{kk}{\delta }_{ij}+2\mu e_{ij}$. Since incompressibility means $e_{kk}=0$, adding the arbitrary isotropic pressure givesAt a material interface between ordinary viscous fluids without interfacial slip, velocity is continuous, and its normal component equals the interface's normal speed. Tangential traction is continuous when surface tension is constant. Normal traction has the curvature-dependent surface tension jump; in a convention defining signed curvature $\kappa$ by the balance, $({\sigma }_{+}-{\sigma }_{-})n=\gamma \kappa n$. With no surface tension, the full traction is continuous. At rigid stationary walls the no-slip boundary condition imposes zero velocity.

Put $G=-dp/dx>0$ and seek $u=u_{\pm }(y)e_x$. The convective acceleration vanishes, and the Navier-Stokes equations reduce to ${\mu }_{\pm }{u}_{\pm }^{\prime \prime }=-G$, with $p=p_0-Gx$. continuity of velocity and tangential traction at $y=0$ gives a common interface velocity $U_0$ and a common shear integration constant $C$:Imposing $u_{-}(-a)=u_{+}(a)=0$ givesThe velocity has no normal component, so the flat interface remains stationary, and its normal stresses match because pressure is common. These expressions give the two-layer plane Poiseuille flow with unequal viscosities.

Take the upward direction as ${\mathbf{e}}_z$, with polar angle $\theta$ measured from it. The liquid is quiescent at infinity. On a translating clean inviscid bubble, the kinematic boundary condition is $(\mathbf{u}-U{\mathbf{e}}_z)\cdot \mathbf{n}=0$, and the stress-free boundary condition is zero tangential traction. The normal traction must balance uniform gas pressure and any constant-curvature surface-tension jump.

For a vertical Stokeslet of strength $F$, the radial velocity is $u_r=F\cos \theta /(4\pi \mu r)$. Its traction on a concentric sphere is purely normal, so zero tangential traction is automatic. The kinematic condition at $r=a$ givesThe singularity is only a device for generating the exterior solution; there is no liquid point force inside the actual bubble. The integrated dynamic traction on the bubble is $-F{\mathbf{e}}_z$, giving the clean-bubble Stokes drag. The upward buoyancy is $4\pi \rho g{a}^3/3$, hence force balance gives

The normal stress also shows that surface tension is not required for this particular spherical solution. Let the ambient hydrostatic pressure at the bubble centre be $p_c$, so on its surface $p_h=p_c-\rho ga\cos \theta$. Adding the Stokeslet's dynamic normal traction giveswhere the terminal buoyancy value of $F$ cancels the dipole. This is the spherical clean bubble without surface tension balance: an initially spherical bubble can remain spherical in this ideal steady Stokes solution even when surface tension is zero. With uniform surface tension $\gamma$, choose gas pressure $p_b=p_c+2\gamma /a$; with $\gamma =0$, $p_b=p_c$. This proves compatibility of the spherical shape, not stability of arbitrary deformations or validity when inertia matters.

Let the longitudinal variation scale be $\ell \gg h$. The stress-free boundary condition gives $\mu (u_z+w_x)=0$ at each face. Incompressibility implies $w=O(hu/\ell )$, so $w_x$ is smaller than a putative $u_z=O(u/h)$ by $O(h^2/{\ell }^2)$. The leading Stokes equation and the two shear-free conditions therefore make $u$ independent of $z$; its thickness-dependent correction is smaller-order. Symmetry gives $w=0$ at $z=0$, and incompressibility integrates toVertical momentum makes the leading normal stress independent of $z$. With the normal directed from liquid into gas, the upper-face curvature is $-h_{xx}/2$ to leading order. The Young–Laplace equation givesThe Newtonian fluid stress tensor also gives ${\sigma }_{zz}=-p+2\mu w_z=-p-2\mu u_x$. Hence $p=p_a-\gamma h_{xx}/2-2\mu u_x$ andThe factor four is the planar extension factor: both the longitudinal viscous stress and the pressure adjustment from transverse contraction contribute.

For force balance on the illustrated slice, the vertical cuts give $(h{\sigma }_{xx}{)}_x\delta x$. Pressure on the sloping broad faces gives $p_a{h}_x\delta x$ horizontally. Each of the two interfaces exerts a tangential surface tension pull at each cut, with horizontal component $\gamma \cos \theta$, where $\tan \theta =h_x/2$. Thus the horizontal force balance is the derivative of the effective tensionto the retained small-slope order. The ambient-pressure contributions cancel in this excess tension. Differentiating cancels the two $h_x{h}_{xx}$ terms, leaving the planar viscous-sheet stretching equationsThe upper-face kinematic condition is $w(x,h/2,t)=(h_t+u{h}_x)/2$. Combining it with $w=-z{u}_x$ gives the second equation,which is conservation of mass per unit transverse width.

For the two bubbles, let $p_g$ be the common gas pressure and $p_e$ the surrounding liquid pressure away from the sheet. A cylindrical bubble has one nonzero principal curvature, so the Young–Laplace equation gives $p_g-p_e\simeq \gamma /a$. In the nearly flat sheet the normal stress is $-p_g$, giving liquid pressure $p_{\mathrm{film}}=p_g-2\mu u_x$. The extensional correction is small compared with $\gamma /a$ because the transition scale will satisfy $\sqrt{a{h}_0}/L\ll 1$. Thus $p_{\mathrm{film}}\simeq p_g>p_e$, and this capillary pressure difference drives liquid out through both ends.

For a spatially uniform flat sheet, $h_x=h_{xxx}=0$, so the longitudinal equation gives $u_{xx}=0$. Reflection symmetry at $x=0$ selectsHere $U$ is the outward speed at the positive end. The mass equation then gives $h_t=-Uh/L$, independent of $x$, so initially uniform thickness remains uniform. Writing it as $h_0(t)$,The end transitions determine $U$, as derived in the following parts.

The free surface is a material surface, so its kinematic boundary condition isWith constant atmospheric pressure $p_a$ and no surface tension, the dynamic boundary condition for an inviscid interface follows from Unsteady Bernoulli equation:Write $\varphi =Ux+\phi$, where $\phi$ and $\eta$ are small. Choose the time-dependent potential gauge so the undisturbed right-hand side is $U^2/2$. Retaining first-order terms, evaluated at $y=0$, givesThe incompressibility condition also gives Laplace's equation for $\phi$.

Set $\Omega =\omega -kU$. Substitution of the specified normal mode into the two linearized boundary conditions yields $-i\Omega a=ikb$ and $\Omega b+ga=0$. Eliminating $b$ gives the dispersion relationThe decay factor $e^{ky}$ in a fluid extending to $y=-\infty$ uses $k>0$. With signed wavenumber the decaying factor is $e^{|k|y}$ and the right-hand side is $g|k|$. The frequency shift is the advection of a deep-water gravity wave by the uniform current.

For the motionless uniform layer, the heat equation reduces to $T_{zz}=0$. The lower temperature and upper heat-transfer condition determine the quasistatic temperature of a conductively cooled film:When $\alpha h/\kappa \ll 1$, $T_s=T_0-\Delta T\alpha h/\kappa +O(\Delta T(\alpha h/\kappa {)}^2)$. For a varying film let its vertical velocity scale as $Uh/L$, as required by incompressible flow. Relative to vertical thermal diffusion, horizontal thermal diffusion is smaller by $(h/L{)}^2$, and either horizontal or vertical thermal advection is smaller by $U{h}^2/(\kappa L)$. Time variation on the film's transport timescale $L/U$ has the same small factor. Thus the leading heat equation is again $T_{zz}=0$ at each $x,t$ when both specified dimensionless parameters are small. This argument retains the small $\alpha h/\kappa$ assumption. If thickness were externally varied on a faster timescale $t_h$, one would additionally need $h^2/(\kappa t_h)\ll 1$; the spatial conditions alone do not control arbitrary rapid time dependence.

Define $b={\gamma }^{\prime }\Delta T\alpha /\kappa >0$. The surface tension at the surface is ${\gamma }_s={\gamma }_0+bh$, so the Marangoni stress is ${\gamma }_{s,x}=b{h}_x$. With capillary pressure $p=-{\gamma }_0{h}_{xx}$ to leading order, horizontal Stokes flow in the film solves $\mu u_{zz}=p_x$, $u(0)=0$, $\mu u_z(h)={\gamma }_{s,x}$. HenceThe continuity equation gives the thermocapillary thin-film equationTo justify using constant surface tension in the capillary pressure, compare the two volume fluxes on horizontal scale $L$: their magnitudes are ${\gamma }_0{h}^4/(3\mu L^3)$ and $b{h}^3/(2\mu L)$. When both mechanisms are retained at leading order, their balance gives $bh/{\gamma }_0=O((h/L{)}^2)\ll 1$. Thus replacing ${\gamma }_s$ by ${\gamma }_0$ in the curvature term incurs only a relative small correction. Equivalently, small $\alpha h/\kappa$ ensures this if ${\gamma }^{\prime }\Delta T/{\gamma }_0$ is bounded; if it were parametrically large, the extra small surface-tension-variation condition would have to be imposed separately.

The capillary pressure is higher beneath a crest than beneath a trough, so pressure-driven volume flux drains the crest and smooths thickness. The Marangoni effect acts oppositely: a thicker region has a colder surface and therefore larger surface tension. Surface velocity is pulled towards that region, supplying more liquid and amplifying the thickness variation. The arrows below represent these two mechanisms separately.

Put $a_c={\gamma }_0/(3\mu )$ and $a_m=b/(2\mu )$. Substitution of $h=\hat{h}H$, $x=\hat{h}X/ϵ$, $t=\hat{t}\tau$ gives coefficients $a_m{ϵ}^2\hat{t}$ and $a_c{ϵ}^4\hat{t}/\hat{h}$. Making both equal to one yieldsIn these scales the fractional surface tension change is $b\hat{h}/{\gamma }_0=2{ϵ}^2/3$, making the previous approximation explicit.

The linear stability analysis about $H=1$ gives ${\eta }_{\tau }+{\eta }_{XX}+{\eta }_{XXXX}=0$. For a normal mode $e^{s\tau +ikX}$,Long waves with $0<|k|<1$ grow, $|k|>1$ decay, and $k=0,\pm 1$ are neutral. The neutral $k=0$ mode changes the mean film thickness. The dispersion relation is even in $k$, with its two maxima at $\pm 1/\sqrt{2}$.

For a steady positive film with zero volume flux, divide $H^2{H}_X+H^3{H}_{XXX}=0$ by $H^3$ and integrate to obtain $H_{XX}+\ln H=C$. Choosing $\hat{h}$ as specified fixes $C=0$. Multiplication by $H_X$ and another integration then give the zero-flux thermocapillary film profiles first integralFor $H>0$, $V^{\prime }=\ln H$ and $V^{\prime \prime }=1/H>0$: the unique minimum is $V(1)=-1$, while $V(0^{+})=0$ and $V(e)=0$. This potential energy interpretation classifies the profiles without assuming a sinusoidal shape at finite amplitude.

For $E=-1$, the only profile is the uniform film $H=1$. For $-1<E<0$, there are two positive turning heights $H_{-}<1<H_{+}<e$ and a smooth periodic film oscillates between them. Its period isFor $E=0$, the maximum is $e$ and the lower endpoint is zero. A drop reaches zero thickness in finite distance, with zero limiting slope but unbounded curvature since $H_{XX}=-\ln H$. Its half-width isThus the formal limiting profile consists of drops of peak height $e$ and footprint width $2\sqrt{\pi e}$, with zero limiting contact angle. Identical drops can touch, or a zero-thickness region can separate them in the degenerate zero-flux model. These are limiting wet-region solutions, not everywhere positive twice differentiable films; the singular contact region is not resolved by lubrication theory. A useful parametric drop profile isFinally let $E=-1+\delta E$ with small positive $\delta E$. Writing $H=1+\eta$ gives $V=-1+{\eta }^2/2+O({\eta }^3)$ and $H_{XX}=-\eta +O({\eta }^2)$. The small-amplitude steady profile is $H=1+\sqrt{2\delta E}\cos (X-X_c)+O(\delta E)$, with period tending to $2\pi$. Its wavenumber tends to the neutral boundary $|k|=1$ of the unstable band, not to the fastest-growing wavenumber.

Use $y$ for height above the horizontal wall. In the lubrication approximation, vertical momentum is hydrostatic and the interfacial stress balance with variable surface tension givesThe horizontal equation is $\mu u_{yy}=B$, with $u(0)=0$ and $\mu u_y(h)={\gamma }_x=-A{C}_x$. ThusIntegrating across the film and adding surface diffusion to surfactant advection gives the dimensional thin-film mass flux and insoluble surfactant flux:These include Marangoni stress, hydrostatic leveling, capillarity and surface diffusion with their signs fixed by the surface traction. In particular the derivative acts on the product of surface tension and curvature, not just on curvature.

Choose $h_{\ast }=(A{C}_0/(\rho g){)}^{1/2}$ and $u_{\ast }=A{C}_0{h}_{\ast }/(\mu L)$. The dimensionless definitions areTogether with the stated concentration and horizontal scales, these giveIn steady flow $Q,J$ are constants by liquid and surfactant conservation.

With capillarity and diffusion neglected, solve these two linear equations for the gradients, in the region $H>0,\Gamma >0$:For positive $Q,J$, the phase plane nullclines are $H=3Q\Gamma /(2J)$ for ${\Gamma }_X=0$ and $H=2Q\Gamma /J$ for $H_X=0$. Above both lines, trajectories go left and upward; between them they go left and downward; below both they go right and downward. There is no positive-quadrant equilibrium. The axes are singular boundaries of this positive-flux reduction, not regular equilibria.

The phase portrait shows these trajectories for one choice of positive fluxes; the two nullcline slopes rescale with $Q/J$.

Take $z$ positive upwards and let $f$ denote axial body force per unit volume. With inertia and surface tension omitted, the extensional equations for a slender Newtonian column areMass conservation gives the first equation. The second uses the Trouton ratio three: the leading radial velocity is $u_r=-r{w}_z/2$, the radial normal traction gives $p=p_{\mathrm{ext}}-\mu w_z$, and the axial stress is $-p_{\mathrm{ext}}+3\mu w_z$. An axial control volume balance then gives the displayed equation. The approximation requires a slender column and slowly varying radius.

Let $h=R-a$. Since the container base is closed, the total volume flux at every section is zero. The column carries flux $\pi a^{2}w$, so the annulus carries $-\pi a^{2}w$ and has mean speed of order $a|w|/h$. Its interfacial shear stress is therefore of order $\lambda \mu a|w|/h^2$. Transmitting this stress through the core produces an axial velocity variation of order $\lambda a^2|w|/h^2$. The plug-flow criterion for a column in a low-viscosity annulus is consequently

Use modified pressure $P=p_{\mathrm{ext}}+\rho gz$, removing the annular fluid's hydrostatic pressure. In a local planar gap, with $y=0$ at the column and $y=h$ at the container wall, lubrication theory givesThe required return flux per unit circumference is $q_g=-aw/2$ to leading order in $h/a$. Its pressure-driven component is larger than the Couette component by $a/h$, so the annular return flow around a slumping column givesThe annular shear contribution to the integrated axial force is smaller than this pressure-gradient term by $h/a$. Retaining the leading terms and substituting $f=-(\rho +\Delta \rho )g$ gives the dimensional equationsThe boundary conditions are $w(0,t)=0$ at the base and $w_z(L(t),t)=0$ at the free upper end; the latter expresses zero excess axial extensional stress.

For $\lambda =0$ and initially constant $a=a_0$, put $G=\Delta \rho g/(3\mu )$. Then $w_{zz}=G$, so

For $\lambda >0$, defineThis function records the leading thin-annulus resistance; differences from curvature and the Couette term enter at the already neglected relative order $h/a$. Choose the extensional screening length of a slumping column and the associated scales asHere $h_0=R-a_0$ denotes the initial annular gap in this question. With $Z=z/\hat{z}$, $T=t/\hat{t}$ and $W=w/\hat{w}$, the dimensional equations reduce to

Initially $\varphi ={\varphi }_0$ and ${\Lambda }_0=L_0/\hat{z}$, so $W_{ZZ}=1+W$, with $W(0)=0$ and $W_Z({\Lambda }_0)=0$. The initial velocity profile of an annularly confined column isThe column thickens everywhere below its stress-free top, while that initial thickening rate is zero at the top.

For a tall column, ${\Lambda }_0\gg 1$, the limiting forms away from exponentially small end corrections areThe bulk falls at approximately $-\hat{w}$, where excess weight balances annular hydraulic resistance. Extensional stresses adjust this velocity to zero in a basal boundary layer of thickness $\hat{z}$; almost all thickening occurs there.

For a short column on this scale, ${\Lambda }_0\ll 1$, while still slender, the limits areThe annular-resistance term $W$ is small, so excess weight is balanced predominantly by extensional viscous stress. The top speed is $-\hat{w}{\Lambda }_0^2/2$, recovering the zero-annular-viscosity result. Thus $\hat{z}$ is the vertical distance over which extensional stress communicates the basal constraint before annular resistance screens it. The sketches below use separate natural normalizations for the two limits.

At leading order in the lubrication approximation, surface arclength is horizontal distance. An insoluble surfactant is transported by the surface velocity, without bulk exchange or diffusion. Conservation of insoluble surfactant on a moving interface therefore becomesThe local hydrostatic pressure and capillary normal stress giveSolve $\mu u_{zz}=p_x$ with no-slip boundary condition at $z=0$ and Marangoni stress $\mu u_z(h)={\gamma }_x=-A{C}_x$. The velocity, surface velocity and volume flux per unit width areMass conservation, $h_t+q_x=0$, yields the thin-film equations with insoluble surfactant:and the corresponding surfactant equation isThe hydrostatic and capillary terms thus affect both the film flux and the surface transport, with different coefficients.

For finite-mass Marangoni spreading on a liquid film, first neglect both pressure-gradient terms. If the spread has size $\ell$, then $C\sim M/\ell$ and $C_x\sim M/{\ell }^2$, giving surface speed $u_s\sim AM{h}_0/(\mu {\ell }^2)$. Equating $\ell /t$ to this speed givesSet $\ell =(AM{h}_{0}t/\mu {)}^{1/3}$ exactly as a similarity scale, and writeOn the positive half of the pool, substitution produces two ordinary differential equations:Symmetry fixes the flux integration constant in the second equation to zero, giving $H{\Gamma }^{\prime }=-\eta /3$ wherever $\Gamma >0$. Substitution into the first equation gives $\eta H^{\prime }=H$. Thus the linear similarity profiles for surfactant spreading have the formThe concentration vanishes at the moving front. The two integral constraints are total surfactant mass and conservation of the fluid volume relative to the undisturbed layer:The first gives $k={\eta }_N^2/3$; the second gives $k{\eta }_N=2$. Therefore ${\eta }_N^3=6$. In physical variables, the solution isOutside the pool the leading outer solution has $h=h_0$, $C=0$. In particular, $h(x_{N-},t)=2h_0$: the subscript means the one-sided limit just behind the front. As a consistency check, the surface speed there is $x_N/(3t)={\dot{x}}_N$ and the fluid jump satisfies the moving-front mass conservation condition. This ideal outer solution has a height jump from $2h_0$ to $h_0$.

That jump cannot persist in a physical interface with nonzero gravity or surface tension. Across a smoothing region of width $\Delta$, $h$ changes by $O(h_0)$. The Marangoni flux scales as $AM{h}_0^2/(\mu x_N^2)$. At $g=0$, its balance with the capillary flux ${\gamma }_0{h}_0^4/(\mu {\Delta }^3)$ gives capillary smoothing of a Marangoni front:Here the surface tension approaches ${\gamma }_0$ at the surfactant-free edge. The assumed concentration-gradient scale is $M/x_N^2$ even inside the smoothing region.

When gravity dominates capillarity, the hydrostatic flux is $\rho g{h}_0^4/(\mu \Delta )$. The same balance gives gravity smoothing of a Marangoni front:The gravity-dominated condition is ${\Delta }^2\gg {\gamma }_0/(\rho g)$, the square of the capillary length. The printed condition omits $\rho$; the expression above restores dimensional consistency.

This width grows faster than $x_N$. It becomes comparable with the pool size whenThe time is a scaling estimate, so numerical factors cannot be fixed by the width balance. For $t\gg t^{\ast }$, the sharp-front similarity profile no longer describes the film: hydrostatic pressure levels the layer over the whole pool, and its thickness tends towards $h_0$ with an increasingly small depression beneath the surfactant. The surface can still spread by Marangoni stress while a hydrostatic-pressure-driven return flow nearly cancels the net film flux. In this gravity-levelled surfactant film, $q\simeq 0$ gives $h_x\simeq -3A{C}_x/(2\rho g{h}_0)$, so the fractional height variation is of order $AM/(\rho g{h}_0^2{x}_N)\ll 1$.

Let $\hat{\eta }$ be the displacement of a material interface and use $[f{]}_{-}^{+}=f_{+}-f_{-}$. On each side, the kinematic boundary condition isThere is one displaced material interface, so its displacement is continuous. Thus the first jump condition isIn particular, vertical velocity need not be continuous when the background velocity jumps.

With no surface tension, pressure continuity applies on the displaced interface, rather than at its undisplaced height. Linearizing gives $[\hat{p}+\hat{\eta }{\overline{p}}^{\prime }{]}_{-}^{+}=0$. Since ${\overline{p}}^{\prime }=-g\overline{\rho }$, this becomes $[\hat{p}-g\overline{\rho }\hat{\eta }{]}_{-}^{+}=0$. The horizontal momentum calculation in part (a) givesSubstitute this and $\hat{\eta }=\hat{w}/[ik(\overline{U}-c)]$ to obtain the second jump condition:These jump conditions for stratified inviscid shear flow use one-sided values of ${\overline{U}}^{\prime }$ and apply to jumps of mass density, vorticity, or velocity. If $\overline{U}$ is continuous, the first condition reduces to continuity of $\hat{w}$; a jump of vorticity generally still prevents continuity of ${\hat{w}}^{\prime }$. This derivation avoids multiplying singular distributional derivatives of a discontinuous velocity in the Taylor–Goldstein equation.

Take $z$ positive downwards. The leading axial velocity of a slender viscous thread is independent of radius. Incompressible flow then gives $u_r=-r{w}^{\prime }/2$, while steady mass conservation gives $(a^{2}w{)}^{\prime }=0$. The Newtonian fluid stress tensor has ${\sigma }_{rr}=-p-\mu w^{\prime }$ and ${\sigma }_{zz}=-p+2\mu w^{\prime }$. The Young–Laplace equation, neglecting axial curvature at slender order, gives ${\sigma }_{rr}=-p_e-\gamma /a$ and hence $p=p_e+\gamma /a-\mu w^{\prime }$.

The axial cut transmits both the integrated Newtonian fluid stress tensor and the circumferential surface tension. After subtracting the ambient pressure, its tensile force isThe coefficient three is the Trouton ratio for axial extension. The last term is essential: the capillary tensile force of a slender thread is $\pi \gamma a$, not $2\pi \gamma a$, because the capillary pressure subtracts half the interfacial line contribution. Axial force balance is $T^{\prime }+\pi \rho g{a}^2=0$. Together the governing equations areDefine the dimensionless variablesThen $a=a_0{W}^{-1/2}$ and the axial equation becomesFor the increasing power-law branch, all three terms have the same dependence when $\alpha =2$. Substitution leaves $1-6k^2-\Gamma k=0$. ThusThis remains valid at $\Gamma =0$, when $k=1/\sqrt{6}$. The other root is negative and describes a decreasing local branch up to its singular endpoint, not a thread accelerating downwards indefinitely. Positive surface tension decreases $k$, so it slows the fall at a given height on this branch. Thinning reduces the capillary tensile force $\pi \gamma a$. Its negative axial derivative supplies an upward capillary force on a thread segment, balancing part of the weight. The viscous tensile force therefore supplies a smaller remaining balance; on the quadratic family this reduces the stretching rate.

The condition $W(0)=1$ alone does not select a unique solution of this second-order ordinary differential equation. The boxed power law is the requested verified branch, with tensile force tending to zero at large height; an additional nozzle tension or downstream condition is required to select it physically. The slender, negligible-inertia approximation must remain valid over the height range considered.