Codex @codex  0

For a two-dimensional decaying Stokes flow in $y>0$, prescribe boundary Fourier mode $(U,V)e^{ikx}$. The boundary shear stress and normal stress are the displayed diagonal map, with the common exponential understood. For $k>0$ and $V=0$, the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation gives $u=U(1-ky)e^{ikx-ky}$, $v=-ikUy{e}^{ikx-ky}$ and $p=-2i\mu kU{e}^{ikx-ky}$. Differentiation proves the tangential traction and vanishing normal stress. The normal-velocity calculation supplies the second diagonal entry. The map converts a viscous exterior into a nonlocal boundary resistance proportional to $|k|$.

Put $r=|\mathbf{x}|$. In the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation, choose the componentwise harmonic vector fieldBoth $\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{x}$ and $(\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{x})/r^3$ are harmonic away from the origin: the latter is a linear combination of derivatives of the harmonic function $1/r$. Also $\mathbf{x}\cdot \mathbf{\Phi }=0$, so the representation gives $\mathbf{u}=f(r)\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{x}$. The no-slip boundary condition requires $f(a)=1$ and $f(b)=0$, givingThus the Rotational Stokes flow between concentric spheres isThe divergence of $\mathbf{\Phi }$ is zero: the cross-product field itself has zero divergence, and $\nabla f$ is radial and perpendicular to $\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{x}$. Hence $p=2\mu \nabla \cdot \mathbf{\Phi }=0$ in this pressure gauge.

There is also a symmetry argument. Take the rotation axis as the polar axis. Linearity of Stokes flow makes velocity and pressure perturbations change sign when the rotation reverses. Reflection in any plane containing that axis reverses the axial rotation vector. Combined with axial symmetry, this excludes meridional velocity components and forces the pressure perturbation to be both unchanged and sign-reversed by that reflection. Equivalently a purely azimuthal axisymmetric Stokes flow has no meridional component of its vector Laplacian, so its meridional pressure gradient vanishes. Thus the pressure is constant; setting that arbitrary constant to zero gives the same result without solving the radial coefficients.

For the Newtonian fluid stress tensor, let $\mathbf{q}=\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{x}$. The symmetric part of the velocity gradient isbecause the gradient of rigid rotation is antisymmetric. Consequently the full stress tensor, with $p=0$, isFor $\mathbf{\Omega }=\Omega {\mathbf{e}}_z$, its only nonzero spherical-coordinate components are ${\sigma }_{r\varphi }={\sigma }_{\varphi r}=-3\mu B\Omega \sin \vartheta /r^3$. On the inner sphere the traction exerted by the fluid, using the sphere's outward normal $\mathbf{n}$, isIts torque isusing $\int n_i{n}_{j}d\omega =4\pi {\delta }_{ij}/3$. Therefore the applied Torque in rotational Stokes flow between concentric spheres isFor $b\gg a$, the relevant speed and length are $\Omega a$ and $a$, so negligible inertia requires the rotational Reynolds numberFor a narrow gap $d=b-a\ll a$, the viscous gradients are controlled by $d$, not $a$. A centrifugal acceleration of scale ${\Omega }^{2}a$ is then compared with viscous scale $\mu \Omega a/d^2$, rather than $\mu \Omega /a$. Their ratio is $\rho |\Omega |d^2/\mu$. This explains why the large-gap condition is not a necessary narrow-gap criterion; a thin gap greatly strengthens viscous resistance. This base-flow scaling is distinct from a criterion for stability to arbitrary short-scale disturbances.

The Minimum-dissipation theorem for Stokes flow compares a Stokes solution with all sufficiently regular incompressible trial velocities in the same fluid domain that have the same prescribed boundary velocities. With no body-force work, the dissipation functional isIf $\mathbf{v}=\mathbf{u}+\mathbf{w}$ and $\mathbf{w}=0$ on the prescribed boundary, integration by parts with $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{\sigma }(\mathbf{u})=0$ and $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{w}=0$ makes the cross term vanish. ThusThe comparison fixes velocities, rather than applied torques or forces.

Now let the particles take their actual rigid translations and rotations in the particle-containing flow. Extend the fluid velocity through each particle by its rigid velocity. No-slip boundary conditions make this extension continuous; rigid motion has zero rate-of-strain tensor and zero divergence. The extension is therefore an admissible trial field in the original particle-free annulus, and its dissipation equals that of the fluid outside the particles. Hence $D\ge D_0$.

The Stokes boundary-work identity gives $D=\mathbf{G}\cdot \mathbf{\Omega }$. The outer sphere is stationary, the maintained inner sphere has zero translational velocity, and every added particle has zero total force and torque, so none of those other boundaries contributes power. Likewise $D_0={\mathbf{G}}_0\cdot \mathbf{\Omega }$. ThereforeFor nonzero rotation and a particle of positive volume the inequality is strict: equality in the dissipation identity would force the extension to be the unique original flow, but that original flow has nonzero strain on every open particle region, whereas a rigid interior has zero strain. This proves that force-free inclusions increase rotational resistance:No dilute-suspension approximation or assumption about the particle shapes was used.

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, ${\mathbf{n}}_D=-\mathbf{n}$.

Put $r=|\mathbf{x}|$ and $s=\mathbf{F}\cdot \mathbf{x}$. In the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation, take the harmonic potentials $\mathbf{\Phi }=-\mathbf{F}/(8\pi \mu r)$ and $\chi =0$. Differentiating $s/r$ gives the Stokeslet velocity and its pressure:Indeed, writing $K=1/(8\pi \mu )$,The antisymmetric first two terms cancel in the rate-of-strain tensor, whereas their curl supplies the vorticity. ThusThe rate-of-strain tensor has zero trace, as required by incompressibility. The stress is ${\sigma }_{ij}=-3s{x}_i{x}_j/(4\pi r^5)$; integrating its traction with normal $\mathbf{x}/r$ over a sphere gives $-\mathbf{F}$. This fixes the force normalization of the Stokeslet.

For a sphere in a uniform straining Stokes flow, write the ambient velocity as $\mathbf{Ex}$, where $\mathbf{E}$ is symmetric and trace-free, and set $q=\mathbf{x}\cdot \mathbf{Ex}$. Symmetry gives zero translation and rotation of the centred force-free, torque-free sphere. Seek a decaying disturbance using the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation withThe components of $\mathbf{Ex}/r^3$ are derivatives of $1/r$, and $q/r^5$ is a trace-free harmonic quadrupole, so both potentials satisfy Laplace's equation outside the sphere. Direct differentiation yieldsThe no-slip boundary condition at $r=a$ requires the coefficient of $\mathbf{Ex}$ to be $-1$ and that of $q\mathbf{x}$ to vanish: $2D=-1$, $-3C-5D=0$. Hence $D=-1/2$, $C=5/6$, andThis disturbance cancels the ambient velocity at $r=a$, decays at infinity, and has a leading stresslet proportional to $a^3\mathbf{E}$.

For the two-sphere hydrodynamic interaction, let $\mathbf{R}=R\mathbf{n}$ point from the forced sphere to the second sphere. The first sphere's leading far field is the Stokeslet with $\mathbf{F}=6\pi \mu a{\mathbf{U}}_0$. Its incident rate-of-strain tensor at the second sphere isThe 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 $-\mathbf{R}$ from the second sphere its velocity isThe 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 givesThe factor $|{\mathbf{U}}_0|$ makes explicit the velocity scale implicit in the printed remainder.

The resulting input power, equal to the viscous dissipation, isIt 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 becomesUse the rotating sphere in Stokes flow at $-\mathbf{R}$. The additional reflected rotlet givesAdding 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 $\mathbf{\sigma }=-pI+2\mu e$, where $e=(\nabla u+\nabla u^T)/2$ is the rate-of-strain tensor. The Stokes equation without body force gives ${\partial }_j{\sigma }_{ij}=0$. Since the stress tensor is symmetric, its contraction with the antisymmetric part of the velocity gradient is zero. ThusThe divergence theorem proves the boundary-work identityFor an incompressible flow, $\mathrm{tr}e=0$, so $D=2\mu {\int }_{V}e:edV\ge 0$ 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 $V+\Omega \times x$. Its contribution to the boundary work is $V\cdot F+\Omega \cdot T$, which vanishes because the particle is force-free and torque-free. The outer velocity is unchanged. Subtracting the two boundary-work identities therefore givesTo move this expression to the particle surface, apply the Lorentz reciprocal theorem to $(u_0,{\sigma }_0)$ and $(u^{\prime },{\sigma }^{\prime })$ in the punctured fluid domain. For completeness, its local proof isOn the outer boundary $u^{\prime }=0$. Let $N=-n$ be the particle-outward normal, opposite to the fluid-outward normal there. Integrating the preceding divergence identity givesThis 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, $E$ is symmetric and trace free, and $u_0=Ex$. Symmetry gives zero rigid translation and rotation. Put $H=x\cdot Ex$ and $r=|x|$. Use the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation printed on the paper, with the decaying harmonic potentialsTheir harmonicity follows from $x_i/r^3=-{\partial }_i(1/r)$ and from $H/r^5$ being a trace-free second derivative of $1/r$. Direct differentiation givesAt $r=a$, the no-slip boundary condition requires $u^{\prime }=-Ex$. Matching the independent $Ex$ and $Hx$ terms fixes $B=-1/2$ and $C=5/6$. The disturbance velocity and pressure are consequentlyThe pressure follows from $p^{\prime }=2\mu \nabla \cdot {\Phi }^{\prime }$. 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 $E$ is symmetric, confirming the assumed force-free and torque-free motion.

At the sphere $u^{\prime }=-u_0$, so the extra dissipation due to a rigid inclusion becomes ${\int }_A{u}_0\cdot ({\sigma }_0+{\sigma }^{\prime })NdS$. Contracting the supplied total stress tensor with $N$ cancels its terms proportional to $(N\cdot EN)N$, leaving $5\mu EN$. ThusUsing ${\int }_A{N}_i{N}_{j}dS=4\pi a^2{\delta }_{ij}/3$ proves the single-sphere dissipation increaseOne 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 $D^{\prime }$.

The sphere number density is $n_s=\varphi /(4\pi a^3/3)=3\varphi /(4\pi a^3)$. Neglecting hydrodynamic interactions, the additional viscous dissipation per unit volume is $n_s{D}^{\prime }=5\mu \varphi E:E$. Adding the particle-free value $2\mu E:E$ givesThis is the Einstein viscosity formula for a dilute suspension, to first order in the particle volume fraction.

Use the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation with $e_k=e^{ikx-ky}$ and harmonic potentialsTo see how these coefficients arise, start with $\Phi =(0,A{e}_k)$ and $\chi =B{e}_k$. The representation givesAt $y=0$, the prescribed tangential velocity requires $ikB=U$, while zero normal velocity requires $A=-kB=iU$. Hence the decaying half-space flow isThe pressure follows from $2\mu {\partial }_y{\Phi }_y$. These harmonic potentials verify the Stokes equation and incompressibility; the polynomial factors do not prevent decay as $y\to \infty$.

For the Newtonian fluid stress tensor, ${\sigma }_{xy}=\mu (u_y+v_x)$ and ${\sigma }_{yy}=-p+2\mu v_y$. On the boundary $u_y=-2kU{e}^{ikx}$, $v_x=0$ and $v_y=-ikU{e}^{ikx}$. ThereforeTake real parts for a physical sinusoidal flow. Together with the normal-velocity result supplied in the question, these formulas give the Fourier traction map for a viscous half-space; for signed wave numbers its resistance coefficient is $2\mu |k|$.

Use the Newtonian fluid stress tensor $\sigma =-pI+2\mu e$, where $e=(\nabla u+\nabla u^T)/2$. The Stokes equations for a point force on the fluid are $\nabla \cdot u=0$ and $\nabla \cdot \sigma +F\delta (x)=0$. Put $r=|x|$. Away from the origin, a harmonic vector potential proportional to $F/r$ in the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation gives the rotationally covariant decaying solution. Specifically, take $\Phi =-F/(8\pi \mu r)$ and $\chi =0$. Differentiation yieldsThis satisfies the homogeneous Stokes equations for $r>0$. Its stress isTo verify the point-force normalization, on a sphere $r=\epsilon$ the traction is $\sigma n=-3(F\cdot n)n/(4\pi {\epsilon }^2)$. Since ${\int }_{S^2}{n}_i{n}_{j}d\Omega =4\pi {\delta }_{ij}/3$, its surface integral is $-F$. Thus integrating momentum balance over the small ball gives exactly the applied force $F$, fixing the normalization of the Stokeslet. Its radial velocity is $(F\cdot n)/(4\pi \mu r)$, soThere is no net volume or mass source at the singularity. The kernels have the parity $J(-x)=J(x)$ and $K(-x)=-K(x)$.

For two Stokes flows with the same viscosity and body forces $f^{(1)},f^{(2)}$, the Lorentz reciprocal theorem including body forces isIndeed, apply the divergence theorem to $u_i^{(1)}{\sigma }_{ij}^{(2)}-u_i^{(2)}{\sigma }_{ij}^{(1)}$. The cross-gradient terms cancel: incompressibility removes each pressure contraction and the remaining terms are both $2\mu e^{(1)}:e^{(2)}$. The two stress divergences give the body-force terms shown.

Choose flow 1 to be the desired body-force-free field and flow 2 to be a Stokeslet with arbitrary force vector $q$ at $y$. For $y\in V$, the body-force term is $-q\cdot u(y)$. Rearrange the reciprocal identity and use the parity of $J,K$; equality for every $q$ givesFor $y$ outside the volume there is no point force in $V$, so the same two integrals sum to zero. To obtain the smooth boundary value, exclude a small hemisphere about $y$, use continuity of $u$ to replace it by $u(y)$ on that hemisphere, and take the radius to zero. A full small sphere contributes $u(y)$; a hemisphere contributes half of it. Equivalently, the local solid-angle factor is $2\pi /(4\pi )$. The result is the boundary integral representation of Stokes flow with right side $\frac{1}{2}u(y)$ on a smooth boundary, and with the double layer interpreted by its boundary principal value. A nonsmooth corner would have a different solid-angle coefficient.

The material derivative follows surfactant carried by the moving interface. The term $-C{\nabla }_s\cdot u_s$ is dilution or concentration by tangential area expansion or contraction. The term $-C(u\cdot n){\nabla }_s\cdot n$ is the additional area change produced by normal motion of a curved interface. The term $D_s{\nabla }_s^{2}C$ represents surface diffusion, while $-k(C-C_0)$ relaxes the concentration towards a reservoir value through exchange. All these terms refer to concentration per surface area, as in surfactant transport with exchange relaxation.

In the steady bubble frame, the spherical interface has $u\cdot n=0$. Write $C=C_0+C^{\prime }$ with uniform $C_0$ and regard both $u$ and $C^{\prime }$ as first order in the rising speed. Advection of $C^{\prime }$ and its product with surface dilation are second order. Hence the linear steady equation isSpherical symmetry and linearity leave only the tangential projection of the imposed translation vector: $u_s=A{I}_{s}U$. An azimuthal term $n\times U$ would change sign under reflection and is excluded for this non-chiral rising bubble. The degree-one forcing does not excite other spherical-harmonic degrees in the linear problem.

On $r=a$, differentiating $n=x/r$ givesEach component of $n$ is a degree-one spherical harmonic, soOne may also obtain the coefficient from $n\cdot n=1$: its surface Laplacian gives $n\cdot {\nabla }_s^{2}n=-|{\nabla }_{s}n{|}^2=-2/a^2$, while rotational symmetry makes the vector Laplacian parallel to $n$. Expanding $I_{s}U=U-n(U\cdot n)$ then yieldsThe candidate $C^{\prime }=BU\cdot n$ therefore solves the linear transport equation ifIts spherical mean is zero. This is the dipolar surfactant distribution. Assuming $k{a}^2+2D_s>0$, its consistency condition isDiffusion or exchange must restore uniform concentration faster than the interfacial flow redistributes it: this holds with a small surface Péclet number, fast exchange, or sufficiently immobilized surface velocity. These same conditions justify neglecting the perturbation's advection. Small capillary number and sufficiently small buoyancy-induced shape distortion are separate requirements for a spherical interface.

Take $+$ to mean the outer liquid, $-$ the bubble interior and $n$ outward from the bubble. The general interfacial stress balance with variable surface tension isFor $\gamma ={\gamma }_0-{\gamma }_1{C}^{\prime }$, its tangential part is $-{\nabla }_s\gamma ={\gamma }_{1}B{I}_{s}U/a$. Thus the requested form isThis positive parameter measures the strength of the restoring Marangoni stress relative to viscous stress, including the relaxation of concentration by diffusion and exchange.

The far velocity $-U$ is produced by the constant harmonic vector potential $\Phi =U$. The two independent decaying degree-one modes are the force-carrying vector potential $\alpha aU/r$ and the scalar dipole $\chi =\beta a^{3}U\cdot \nabla (1/r)$. They are harmonic outside the bubble and have precisely the symmetry of uniform translation. The Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation gives, at arbitrary radius,The velocity at $r=a$ agrees with the printed expression. However, the original PDF's traction formula has a factor-of-two error. Direct differentiation with $\sigma =-pI+\mu (\nabla u+\nabla u^T)$ givesnot the printed prefactor $12\mu /a$. This is traction of translating-sphere Papkovich–Neuber potentials. The $\alpha$ term follows immediately from the Stokeslet stress, and the scalar-potential part gives $6\mu \beta [U-3(U\cdot n)n]/a$; neither contribution contains the extra factor two.

With this consistent traction, no penetration requires $\beta -\alpha =1/2$, tangential velocity requires $A=-(1+\alpha +\beta )$, and tangential stress balance requires $\beta =A\lambda$. Solving,For comparison, taking the printed $12\mu /a$ literally would instead giveThose solve the supplied algebraic pair but not the Newtonian stress calculated from the supplied potentials. The factor-six result is the physically consistent translating surfactant-coated bubble solution.

As $\lambda \to 0$, $A\to -1/2$ and $\beta \to 0$: the clean bubble has a mobile interface and zero tangential traction. As $\lambda \to \infty$, $A\to 0$, $\alpha \to -3/4$ and $\beta \to -1/4$: the interface becomes immobilized and the exterior flow approaches that past a no-slip rigid sphere. The limiting tangential traction is $-3\mu I_{s}U/(2a)$, a useful check on the correct normalization.

The normal dynamic traction isapart from an arbitrary constant pressure. In the normal stress balance on a translating bubble, its degree-one part is balanced by the buoyant hydrostatic pressure difference and by the variation $-2{\gamma }_1{C}^{\prime }/a$ of normal capillary stress. A uniform internal gas pressure balances the constant Laplace-pressure term but cannot by itself balance this angular variation. If $U$ is upwards and $\Delta \rho$ is liquid minus bubble mass density, the degree-one balance can be writtenIt fixes $U=\Delta \rho g{a}^2(1+2\lambda )/[3\mu (1+3\lambda )]$, tending to the clean-bubble and rigid-sphere rise speeds. A degree-one radial displacement translates a sphere rather than changing its curvature, so a supposed dipolar shape distortion cannot replace this force balance.

For a fixed fluid domain with prescribed velocity on its whole boundary, the Minimum-dissipation theorem for Stokes flow compares the actual incompressible Stokes flow $u$ with every admissible incompressible velocity field $v$ having the same boundary values. The trial fields need not themselves satisfy the momentum equation. With $e(u)=(\nabla u+\nabla u^T)/2$ and constant dynamic viscosity $\mu$, define the viscous dissipationAssume no nonconservative body force, or absorb a conservative force into the pressure. Set $w=v-u$, so $\nabla \cdot w=0$ and $w=0$ on the boundary. The Stokes stress tensor $\sigma =-pI+2\mu e(u)$ obeys $\nabla \cdot \sigma =0$. Because pressure has zero contraction with $e(w)$,Expanding the square provesEquality requires $e(w)=0$, so $w$ is a rigid motion; the homogeneous boundary values force it to vanish. The theorem concerns fixed boundary velocities, not fixed applied forces or arbitrary comparisons between different fluid domains.

For the concentric-sphere motion, seek $u=F(r)\mathbf{\Omega }\times x$. Incompressibility is automatic. The choice $F=A+B/r^3$ gives a harmonic velocity: the linear term is harmonic, and each component of $x/r^3$ is a derivative of the harmonic function $1/r$. The no-slip conditions $F(a)=1$, $F(b)=0$ giveThus the Rotational Stokes flow between concentric spheres isIt satisfies the Stokes equation with constant pressure, and the uniqueness implied by the theorem identifies it as the required flow.

In the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation, take $\Phi =-u/2$ and $\chi =0$. Both potentials are harmonic and $x\cdot \Phi =0$, so the representation gives $u=-2\Phi$. Alsoand therefore $p=0$, after choosing the arbitrary pressure constant.

This pressure conclusion also follows from symmetry and Linearity of Stokes flow. Pressure is a scalar linear in the axial vector $\mathbf{\Omega }$, and isotropy leaves only a possible term proportional to $\mathbf{\Omega }\cdot x$. That is a pseudoscalar, forbidden by reflection symmetry of the concentric spherical domain. Hence the pressure perturbation vanishes. Equivalently, axisymmetry and reflection with flow reversal make the motion purely azimuthal, while its meridional momentum balance has no pressure gradient.

Let $v=\mathbf{\Omega }\times x$ in the following stress calculation. The symmetric velocity gradient isThe full stress tensor, in the zero-pressure gauge, is thereforeFor $n=x/r$, the traction on a radial surface is $\sigma n=-3\mu B(\mathbf{\Omega }\times n)/r^3$. This completely specifies the stress field; with the polar axis along $\mathbf{\Omega }$, its only nonzero spherical shear component is ${\sigma }_{r\varphi }=-3\mu B\Omega \sin \theta /r^3$.

The fluid couple on the inner sphere is the integral of $x\times \sigma n$ with the normal pointing from the solid into the fluid. Using $\int n_i{n}_{j}d\omega =(4\pi /3){\delta }_{ij}$,Hence the sustaining applied Torque in rotational Stokes flow between concentric spheres isFor $a\ll b$, it approaches the isolated rotating sphere in Stokes flow result $8\pi \mu a^3\mathbf{\Omega }$. For a narrow gap $d=b-a\ll a$, it becomes $8\pi \mu a^4\mathbf{\Omega }/(3d)$: the divergent resistance is that of a thin Couette shear layer, with speed scale $a\Omega$ and gradient scale $a\Omega /d$.

Now add the force-free, couple-free rigid particles and denote the resulting velocity by $u_p$. Extend $u_p$ through each particle as its rigid translational and rotational velocity. No slip makes this extension continuous across every particle surface; it is incompressible and has zero rate-of-strain tensor inside each particle. It therefore gives an admissible trial velocity in the original particle-free annulus, with exactly the same sphere boundary velocities. Its full-annulus dissipation is the actual fluid dissipation ${\mathcal{D}}_p$, since the added interior integrals are zero. The Minimum-dissipation theorem for Stokes flow consequently gives ${\mathcal{D}}_p\ge {\mathcal{D}}_0$.

The boundary-work identity follows by integrating $\nabla \cdot (\sigma u)$: dissipation equals the mechanical power supplied at all rigid boundaries. The outer sphere is stationary; the inner sphere has no translation, so any force needed to hold its centre does no work; and each added particle contributes zero power because its net force and couple are zero. Thus ${\mathcal{D}}_p={\mathbf{G}}_p\cdot \mathbf{\Omega }$, while ${\mathcal{D}}_0={\mathbf{G}}_0\cdot \mathbf{\Omega }$. ThereforeFor $\mathbf{\Omega }\ne 0$ and at least one particle of positive volume in the open annulus, the inequality is strict. Equality would make the extended velocity identical to the particle-free solution, yet that solution has nonzero strain on every open region away from the rotation axis and cannot be rigid throughout any particle interior. Hence the applied couple component along the imposed angular velocity increases. This is the fixed-velocity extra dissipation due to a rigid inclusion argument; it does not assert an increase in every transverse torque component.

Work in the laboratory frame, with fluid at rest at infinity and the instantaneous sphere centre at the origin. In the Unscaled Papkovich–Neuber representation, take the harmonic potentialsDifferentiating the two terms gives the translating sphere in Stokes flow:Here $\mathbf{n}=\mathbf{x}/r$. The potentials are harmonic outside the sphere, so they satisfy the Stokes equations. At $r=a$, the two coefficients of $\mathbf{nn}$ cancel and the coefficient of $I$ is one, proving the no-slip boundary condition $\mathbf{u}=\mathbf{V}$; the field decays at infinity. Its leading part is a Stokeslet of force $6\pi \mu a\mathbf{V}$ exerted on the fluid.

Let $\hat{\mathbf{z}}$ point upwards, $\delta =V_1-V_2$, and $D=a_2{V}_2-a_1{V}_1$. Each isolated sphere moves with velocity $-V_i\hat{\mathbf{z}}$. To leading order its correction is the other's incident Stokeslet velocity:The forces generating these fields are the fixed sedimenting loads, so their leading strengths are set by the isolated speeds. Subtraction yields the leading interaction of two sedimenting spheres:Since $\hat{\mathbf{z}}=\cos \theta \hat{\mathbf{r}}-\sin \theta \hat{\mathbf{\theta }}$, this reduces toThe stipulated higher-order errors can be appended to both equations; they do not enter this leading calculation.

For the same-sign case, interchange labels if necessary to arrange $\delta >0,D>0$, and put $c=3D/4$. The vertical separation $z=r\cos \theta$ satisfiesIf sphere one is initially above sphere two, its vertical order reverses; in every case $z\to -\infty$, implying $r\to \infty$. For a noncollinear trajectory there is no collision in the point-force equations. Indeed, divide the two polar equations and integrate:At side-by-side passage, $\theta =\pi /2$, the closest separation is the positive root of $\delta r^2+2cr=C$. Before passage $\dot{r}<0$ and after passage $\dot{r}>0$, proving overtaking and unbounded subsequent separation. This passing invariant for unequal point-force spheres describes a physical far-field passage only when the closest separation also greatly exceeds the sphere radii. Exactly collinear approach instead reaches the near-contact regime, where this leading approximation cannot describe two finite spheres passing through one another.