Codex @codex  0

First estimate transverse relaxation without assuming a thin cross-section. With both depth and width of order $h_0$, a transverse surface-height variation of order $h_0$ gives a pressure gradient of order $\rho g$. The Stokes equation then gives transverse horizontal and vertical velocities of order $g{h}_0^2/\nu$. Moving the surface through distance $h_0$ takesFor longitudinal variations over $L\gg h_0$, the hydrostatic pressure gradient is of order $\rho g{h}_0/L$, so the longitudinal velocity is $u\sim g{h}_0^3/(\nu L)$. Incompressibility gives a vertical velocity $w\sim h_{0}u/L$, henceThus cross-channel variations relax rapidly compared with the longitudinal evolution. These are viscous estimates, requiring inertial relaxation to be negligible; the slow-flow regime in particular excludes a large transverse inertial response. After that initial relaxation the free surface is nearly horizontal across the channel, so its height is $h_0(x,t)$ and its local vertical depth is $h_0-|y|\cot \alpha$.

Retain the full cross-sectional geometry for a fixed $0<\alpha <\pi /2$; no small-angle approximation is used. With $|h_{0x}|\ll 1$, the leading hydrostatic pressure is $p=p_a+\rho g(h_0-z)$. Axial viscous derivatives are small relative to cross-sectional ones. The axial Stokes equation is thereforeIntroduce $Y=y/h_0$, $Z=z/h_0$, and the triangular domainLet the dimensionless cross-sectional Poisson equation beThe two lower sloping sides impose the no-slip boundary condition; the upper horizontal side imposes the stress-free boundary condition. Symmetry would additionally give ${\varphi }_Y=0$ at $Y=0$ if only half the domain were used. The full domain needs no extra midline boundary condition. Define $Q(\alpha )={\int }_{{\mathcal{D}}_{\alpha }}\varphi dYdZ$. ThenThe cross-sectional area is $A=h_0^2\tan \alpha$. Conservation of mass, $A_t+q_x=0$, gives the V-shaped channel gravity current equationIn particular, neither replacing this triangular Poisson problem by a vertically parabolic film nor taking an extreme angle is necessary.

Put $C=gQ(\alpha )/(\nu \tan \alpha )$. For a symmetric fixed-volume similarity solution, write $h_0=t^{-b}f(x{t}^{-d})$. Volume conservation gives $d=2b$, and balancing $(h_0^2{)}_t=C(h_0^4{h}_{0x}{)}_x$ gives $2b+1=5b+2d$. Hence $b=1/7$, $d=2/7$. Integrating the similarity equation once, with zero flux at the centre, yieldsIntegrating again and imposing $h_0=0$ at $x=\pm X(t)$ givesThe constant-volume similarity in a V-shaped channel has a compact support. If $H(t)=h_0(0,t)$, its volume isEliminating $H$ therefore givesThis describes the large-time spreading from a localized release; the point-release profile is singular at $t=0$, and the idealized front has a narrow region where its divergent slope violates the long-wave approximation. Neither feature changes the leading bulk similarity law.

At a fixed nonzero $x^{\ast }$, the depth is initially zero until $X(t)=|x^{\ast }|$. After arrival it rises and then falls. Because $X^2\propto t^{4/7}$, differentiation of $h_0(x^{\ast },t{)}^3=3(X^2-x^{\ast 2})/(7Ct)$ givesThus its unique maximum occurs at $X^2=7x^{\ast 2}/3$; thereafter the depth tends to zero as $t^{-1/7}$. If $t_a$ is the arrival time, $t_{\max }/t_a=(7/3{)}^{7/4}$. At the singular release point $x^{\ast }=0$, the point-source similarity profile instead decreases from the start; a finite initial release regularizes its early behaviour.

The right-hand sketch shows the triangular bulk at half its previous maximum depth, with thin draining films on the previously wetted portions of both walls. These residual wall films in a receding gravity current are not captured by a perfectly dry-wall triangular section. They drain rapidly compared with bulk longitudinal spreading. For an order-one angle, a wall film of thickness $b$ and wetted length $\ell$ has speed $O(g{b}^2/\nu )$ by falling film flow; its drainage time gives $b\sim (\nu \ell /(gt){)}^{1/2}$. At a fixed nonzero station the previous maximum wetted height is finite, so film area decays as $t^{-1/2}$, faster than the bulk area $h_0^2\sim t^{-2/7}$. In stations whose arrival and peak times are of order the observation time, the typical residual film fraction is $O(\sqrt{{\tau }_y/t})\to 0$. Therefore the films modify the detailed receding cross-section but do not hold a leading-order fraction of the volume or invalidate the large-time nose law. Microscopic contact-line physics is beyond this ideal viscous model.

Balance the two terms in the planar viscous-sheet stretching equations over the transition. The velocity changes by $O(U)$ on length $\delta$, and $h_{xxx}=O(h_0/{\delta }^3)=O(1/(a\delta ))$. ThusUsing the geometric transition length givesThis balances capillary forcing with planar extensional viscous stress, not the no-slip Poiseuille resistance appropriate to a film bounded by rigid walls.

Take $p$ as excess pressure relative to the fluid far from the gap, and let ${\dot{h}}_0<0$ for approach. The lower surface of the sphere is $h_0+a-\sqrt{a^2-r^2}$ above the plane. In the dominant region $r=O(\sqrt{a{h}_0})\ll a$, this is the parabolic lubrication gapIts slope is $O(\sqrt{h_0/a})\ll 1$, justifying lubrication theory. Both rigid surfaces have zero radial velocity, so the no-slip boundary condition and radial Stokes equation give the radial volume flux per unit circumferenceAxisymmetric conservation of mass gives $h_t+r^{-1}(rq{)}_r=0$. Symmetry at $r=0$ therefore yields $q=-r{\dot{h}}_0/2$, hence $p_r=6\mu {\dot{h}}_{0}r/h^3$. Matching to $p\to 0$ outside the pressure-bearing region givesExtending the parabolic profile to infinity in this integral is a leading-order matching device; the main pressure and force come from $r=O(\sqrt{a{h}_0})$.

The radial scale $\sqrt{a\hat{h}}$ balances the two contributions to the gap. The time scale $\hat{h}/\hat{v}$ is the time for a typical gap change, and the lubrication pressure scale $\mu a\hat{v}/{\hat{h}}^2$ follows either from the formula above or from $p\sim \mu \hat{v}{\ell }^2/{\hat{h}}^3$ with ${\ell }^2=a\hat{h}$. The elastic surface's upward displacement is $-\eta p$, so the actual gap is increased by $+\eta p$. Thus the dimensionless gap in weakly compliant sphere-plane squeeze flow isA dot now means differentiation with respect to $T$. The dimensionless Reynolds lubrication equation isEven without fluid inertia, the elastic surface has a pressure-dependent normal velocity, so ${\mathcal{H}}_T$ includes $\epsilon P_T$; omitting it would wrongly discard the acceleration term below.

Write $d=H_0+R^2/2$ and abbreviate $H=H_0$, $v={\dot{H}}_0$, $b={\ddot{H}}_0$ during the calculation. The rigid term isAt first order the Reynolds equation givesBecause $RdR=dd$, one integration givesSet $\xi =R^2/(2H)$, so $d=H(1+\xi )$. Dividing and changing variables yieldsThe first three terms are derivatives of $I_3,I_4,I_5$, respectively. Integrating from infinity to enforce $P_1\to 0$ givesThe rational expansion of $I_n$ follows by differentiating $\log [\xi /(1+\xi )]+{\sum }_{j=1}^{n-1}[j(1+\xi {)}^j{]}^{-1}$, obtaining $1/[\xi (1+\xi {)}^n]$, and fixing its value to zero at infinity.

Near $\xi =0$ every $I_n$ has the same singular term $\log \xi$. Its coefficient must vanish to keep the pressure regular, soEquivalently, the integrated radial flux above must vanish at $R=0$; otherwise $P_{1R}$ would have a $1/R$ singularity. Using $I_4=I_3+[3(1+\xi {)}^3{]}^{-1}$ and $I_5=I_4+[4(1+\xi {)}^4{]}^{-1}$ cancels all logarithms and gives the simplified regular expression

The upward hydrodynamic force has scale $\mu a^2\hat{v}/\hat{h}$. Its leading contribution is pressure integrated over horizontal projected area; vertical shear forces are smaller in the lubrication limit. Thus $F=2\pi {\int }_0^{\infty }(P_0+\epsilon P_1+\cdots )RdR$. Use $RdR=H_{0}d\xi$ and ${\int }_0^{\infty }(1+\xi {)}^{-n}d\xi =1/(n-1)$. The two contributions areTherefore

For weight-controlled sedimentation, let the fixed effective load be $F=6\pi A$, $A>0$, and neglect particle inertia as well as fluid inertia. At leading order ${\dot{H}}_0=-A{H}_0$ and ${\ddot{H}}_0=A^2{H}_0$. The first-order bracket evaluated on this trajectory is $-(7/5)A^2/H_0^2$. Solving the force balance perturbatively therefore givesHence weak compliance initially increases the sedimentation speed in the regime where the perturbation is valid. The squeeze pressure indents the coating away from the sphere, widens the flow passage and lowers resistance. This is a load-controlled conclusion on the slow sedimenting branch, not a claim about an arbitrary externally imposed acceleration at startup.

The load-controlled breakdown of weak squeeze-flow compliance occurs when the relative correction $O(\epsilon A/H_0^2)$ becomes order one:The central rigid pressure has size $P_0(0)\sim A/H_0$, so the relative elastic gap change is also $\epsilon P_0(0)/H_0\sim \epsilon A/H_0^2$. Thus breakdown means that elastic deflection is comparable with the nominal undeformed gap. The regular expansion about a rigid plane then ceases to be uniform and the coupled elastic-lubrication problem must be retained. It does not by itself imply contact, fluid inertia or failure of the thin-gap geometry.

An anti-dynamo theorem identifies a restriction that prevents a conducting fluid from regenerating its magnetic field against resistive losses. The hypotheses matter: throughout the following arguments take positive uniform magnetic diffusivity, smooth fields, no imposed magnetic source, and the stated isolated or energy-closed boundary conditions. An anti-dynamo theorem does not rule out transient magnetic amplification, winding of an imposed field, or an externally supplied magnetic flux. The resistive induction equation is the common starting point:

First consider Backus' necessary condition for dynamo action. For a conductor contained in a sphere of radius $a$, include the potential field in the insulating exterior when defining the total magnetic energy:For an incompressible flow, with boundary conditions eliminating the mechanical surface term, such as a no-slip boundary condition for the fluid, integration by parts giveswhere $e_{ij}=({\partial }_i{u}_j+{\partial }_j{u}_i)/2$ is the rate-of-strain tensor. Its antisymmetric part does no stretching, since $B_i{B}_j$ is symmetric. If $S$ bounds the largest eigenvalue of $e$ throughout the flow, the first term is at most $2S{E}_B$.

The magnetic free-decay spectral bound for the enclosing insulating sphere isThe exterior energy is essential to this variational estimate. Its constant comes from the slowest freely decaying dipolar poloidal mode: the spherical radial matching condition reduces to $j_0(\kappa a)=0$, whose first positive root is $\kappa a=\pi$. Expanding an admissible field in the orthogonal free-decay modes, or using their variational characterization, gives the bound. A smaller conductor can only increase the minimum dissipation quotient for the enclosing-sphere comparison. Combining the two estimates yieldsThusBelow this threshold the Gronwall inequality gives exponential energy decay. Above it the estimate merely permits growth; it does not prove that the geometry regenerates the field. A time-dependent version bounds the field-amplitude exponent by the time average of the maximum strain minus the diffusive rate.

The geometric obstruction in Cowling anti-dynamo theorem is different: an isolated exactly axisymmetric magnetic field cannot be self-maintained. To see the missing regeneration mechanism, write its poloidal magnetic field in terms of the poloidal magnetic flux function $\psi$:The poloidal part of the resistive induction equation becomesThere is no term containing $B_{\varphi }$ that creates new poloidal flux. Fix the gauge by setting $\psi =0$ on the regular symmetry axis, and match to a decaying exterior field with no imposed flux. At a positive interior maximum away from the axis, the advective term vanishes and the diffusive term is nonpositive. The parabolic comparison principle therefore prevents increase of the maximum; it likewise prevents decrease of a negative minimum. In the steady problem the strong maximum principle, regularity at the axis and decay outside exclude a nonzero maximum altogether. Matching to the insulating exterior does not create a maximum at the interface: the exterior flux is harmonic in the corresponding axisymmetric operator, and the two normal-derivative conditions exclude such an interface extremum. The same homogeneous scalar diffusion problem gives decay in time on a bounded conductor with no replenishing boundary data.

Once the poloidal field has decayed, let $b=B_{\varphi }/r$ and let ${\Omega }_f=u_{\varphi }/r$ denote the fluid's angular velocity. Its equation isDifferential rotation can make toroidal field from poloidal field, but it cannot close the reverse loop. When ${\mathbf{B}}_p=0$, this too is a homogeneous advection-diffusion equation, with a regular axis and zero toroidal field at an insulating exterior. Hence it cannot sustain the remaining field. The exactly axisymmetric field, rather than merely an axisymmetric velocity, is excluded. If an exactly axisymmetric field were maintained by a nonaxisymmetric velocity, averaging the linear induction equation in azimuth would replace that velocity by its azimuthal mean and give the same contradiction. An axisymmetric flow can, however, excite a nonaxisymmetric field. Also an axisymmetric averaged field in mean-field dynamo theory has an additional fluctuating electromotive force, so this unmodified scalar proof does not apply to it.

The toroidal-velocity anti-dynamo theorem restricts the flow instead. In a conducting sphere, suppose $\mathbf{u}\cdot \mathbf{x}=0$, so the incompressible flow is tangent to every concentric sphere. No assumption of axisymmetry is made. Define $P=\mathbf{x}\cdot \mathbf{B}$. A direct Cartesian calculation is particularly useful:The last equality uses $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{B}=0$, so ${\nabla }^2(\mathbf{x}\cdot \mathbf{B})=\mathbf{x}\cdot {\nabla }^2\mathbf{B}$. Thus the radial magnetic scalar is a passive diffusing scalar, not a regenerated field. Multiplying by $P$, integrating over the sphere and using tangential incompressible advection givesIn an insulating exterior, a spherical harmonic component of degree $l\ge 1$ has $P\propto r^{-l-1}$, so its boundary contribution is negative: ${\partial }_{n}P=-(l+1)P/a$. The monopole component is absent because the magnetic field is solenoidal and regular. The resulting dissipative scalar problem makes $P$, and hence the poloidal field, decay.

When that radial field is absent, the remaining tangential solenoidal field can be written $\mathbf{B}=\nabla \times (T\mathbf{x})$. Its induction equation reduces to a second passive scalar equation. Indeedand the curl of the last gradient term is zero. Therefore $T_t+\mathbf{u}\cdot \nabla T=\eta {\nabla }^{2}T$, up to an irrelevant radial gauge function, which can be removed by taking the angular mean of $T$ to be zero. Its angular variations vanish at the insulating spherical boundary, so this scalar also decays by its quadratic energy identity. Equivalently, a putative growing magnetic normal mode must first have $P=0$, after which the scalar $T$ equation rules it out. Purely toroidal spherical flow cannot close a dynamo regeneration loop, even if it is nonaxisymmetric. This does not assert that purely poloidal flow is always incapable of a dynamo, or that any azimuthally directed cylindrical flow is governed by the same spherical theorem.

Other restrictions illuminate the same distinction between stretching and regeneration. The planar anti-dynamo theorem has a similar scalar proof in the usual two-dimensional geometry. For planar velocity and magnetic field independent of the third coordinate, write the in-plane field as $\nabla \times (A\hat{\mathbf{z}})$. Its vector potential obeys $A_t+\mathbf{u}\cdot \nabla A=\eta \Delta A$ after fixing the gauge, so $\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int A^2=-\eta \int |\nabla A{|}^2$ under periodic or homogeneous energy-closed boundary conditions. A third field component independent of that coordinate is also a passive scalar. A spatially uniform imposed field may survive in a periodic box but is not regenerated dynamo field. Three-component motions depending on only two coordinates are not covered by this strictly planar formulation.

There are also necessary bounds in terms of velocity amplitude rather than strain. The magnetic work term is bounded by $\Vert \mathbf{u}{\Vert }_{\infty }\Vert \mathbf{B}{\Vert }_2\Vert \nabla \times \mathbf{B}{\Vert }_2$; combining this with the same free-decay inequality gives a velocity-based lower threshold on the magnetic Reynolds number. These bounds, like Backus' necessary condition for dynamo action, are necessary rather than sufficient. Pure motion that only rearranges a scalar magnetic potential cannot evade diffusion merely by becoming faster. Conversely the stagnation-flow energy amplification in Question 2 does not contradict the bounded-body theorems: it uses an unbounded three-dimensional strain field and, for its growing finite-energy modes, a slowly decaying field at infinity. Similarly, the torsional Alfvén waves in Question 3 transfer energy between velocity and a toroidal perturbation about a prescribed background; they are not a construction of that background by dynamo action. The anti-dynamo results identify failed regeneration mechanisms and the assumptions under which those failures are rigorous.

Neglect the centrifugal acceleration, which is of order ${\omega }^2$, and use the local flat-surface approximation. To zeroth order in $\omega$, the height above $P$ and flight time areInserting this vertical velocity into the Coriolis acceleration gives the eastward componentWith $x(0)=\dot{x}(0)=0$, two integrations yieldto first order. Horizontal velocity is already of order $\omega$, so its effect on vertical acceleration is of order ${\omega }^2$. Thus the flight time remains $T_0$ at this order. The Coriolis deflection of a vertical projectile at landing isThe displacement is westward, and its magnitude is $4\omega v^3\sin \theta /(3g^2)$. The horizontal speed remains westward during the flight: $\dot{x}=-2\omega \sin \theta z_0(t)$. This explains why the eastward acceleration on descent does not cancel the earlier displacement.

Apply the rotating-frame derivative formula first to position and then to its inertial velocity:The angular velocity is constant, so there is no term involving $\dot{\mathbf{\omega }}$. By Newton's second law in the inertial frame, the inertial acceleration is $\mathbf{F}/m$. Rearrangement gives the equation of motion in a rotating frame:The two additional accelerations are the Coriolis acceleration and centrifugal acceleration.

Take the scalar product of Newton's second law with the velocity $\dot{\mathbf{r}}$. The cross product is perpendicular to its first factor, soConsequentlyThis is conservation of energy: the sum of kinetic energy and potential energy stays fixed. The magnetic-type Lorentz force $\dot{\mathbf{r}}\times \mathbf{B}$ does no work, because it is perpendicular to the instantaneous velocity. It may turn the trajectory but cannot directly change its speed, regardless of the spatial variation of $\mathbf{B}$.

With $\psi =0$, the angular momentum becomes $\mathbf{L}=m\mathbf{r}\times \dot{\mathbf{r}}$ and is constant. The identity $\mathbf{L}\cdot \mathbf{r}=0$ confines the trajectory to the plane through the origin perpendicular to $\mathbf{L}$ when $\mathbf{L}\ne 0$. If $\mathbf{L}=0$, the velocity is radial and a central force preserves the radial line; this degenerate motion is also planar.

For the proposed Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector convention, differentiate $\mathbf{K}=\mathbf{L}\times \dot{\mathbf{r}}-\varphi (r)\mathbf{r}$. Since $\ddot{\mathbf{r}}=-{\varphi }^{\prime }(r)\hat{\mathbf{r}}/m$ and $\mathbf{L}$ is constant, the vector triple product givesThereforeIt vanishes for general motion precisely when $(r\varphi {)}^{\prime }=0$, givingThis is an inverse-square potential, attractive when $C<0$ and repulsive when $C>0$; $C=0$ is the free-particle case. An additive constant in $\varphi$ leaves the force unchanged but would change this particular $\mathbf{K}$ by a constant multiple of $\mathbf{r}$, so its definition requires the displayed choice of energy zero.

Apply the rotating-frame derivative formula first to $r$, then to $v^{\prime }=[dr/dt{]}_{S^{\prime }}$. Since the angular velocity is constant in either frame,The two apparent forces in the rotating equation are the Coriolis force and the centrifugal acceleration multiplied by mass. ThusSet ${\varphi }_{\mathrm{eff}}=\varphi -\frac{m}{2}|\omega \times r{|}^2$. The supplied gradient identity gives $\nabla {\varphi }_{\mathrm{eff}}=\nabla \varphi +m\omega \times (\omega \times r)$. Taking the scalar product with $v^{\prime }$ removes $G$, since it is orthogonal to $v^{\prime }$, and removes the Coriolis force. Therefore the energy balance in a uniformly rotating frame isThe displayed quantity is conserved when the potential is stationary in the rotating coordinates. This includes a static inertial potential invariant under rotations about the chosen axis, such as vertical gravity in part (b). If the word conservative only means a time-independent inertial potential, that extra rotational invariance is needed; a conservative force alone does not imply the claimed conservation.

For an explicit counterexample to that unrestricted interpretation, take unit mass, an inertial force $F=e_x$, $\varphi =-x$, no $G$, rotation $\omega =\omega e_z$, and inertial trajectory $r(t)=(t^2/2,1,0)$ with initial velocity zero. It satisfies Newton's second law. Substituting $v^{\prime }=\dot{r}-\omega \times r$ into the proposed energy gives $E=\omega t$, which is not constant for nonzero rotation. The qualified conservation law above is the one used for the hoop.

By Newton's third law, the force on the second particle is $-F_{12}$. For $M=m_1+m_2$ and centre of mass $R=(m_1{r}_1+m_2{r}_2)/M$, Newton's second law gives $M\ddot{R}=F_{12}-F_{12}=0$. ThusThe centre moves on a straight line with constant velocity; zero velocity is allowed. For the relative position $r=r_1-r_2$, subtraction of the two equations givesHence the two-body problem reduces to a single particle of reduced mass $\mu$, together with the elementary centre motion. Reconstruct the positions as $r_1=R+(m_2/M)r$, $r_2=R-(m_1/M)r$.

Yes: the two equal masses can follow the same fixed circle in diametrically opposite positions. Put the stationary centre of mass at the circle's center and choose tangential velocities with the same sense of rotation. If the circle has radius $a$, the separation is $2a$ and the mutual gravitational force is directed toward that center, with magnitude $G{m}^2/(4a^2)$. The circular orbit condition is $ma{\omega }^2=G{m}^2/(4a^2)$, so an equal-mass circular binary hasThese initial data maintain the opposite positions and give the same constant angular speed for both particles.

Set $\theta =0$ initially and choose its positive sense to agree with the initial tangential motion. The inward radial component is $\dot{r}(0)=-4\cos (\pi /3)=-2$, while the tangential speed is $4\sin (\pi /3)=2\sqrt{3}$. HenceSubstitution in the Binet equation gives $12(u^{\prime \prime }+u)=3+9u$, or $u^{\prime \prime }+u/4=1/4$. This is an orbit equation for combined inverse-square and inverse-cube attraction. Solving the constant-coefficient equation and applying both initial conditions givesOn $0\le \theta \le 2\pi$, the sine is nonnegative, so $r$ stays finite and positive. At $\theta =2\pi$, $u=1$, hence $r=1$ and the particle is back at its original spatial position after one revolution. But $u^{\prime }(2\pi )=-1/\sqrt{3}$, so its radial velocity is now $+2$, rather than the original $-2$. The return is not a periodic return in position and velocity.

After that revolution, the first zero of $u$ is at $\theta =8\pi /3$, where $\sin (\theta /2)=-\sqrt{3}/2$. The physical branch therefore has $r\to \infty$ as $\theta \uparrow 8\pi /3$; it must not be continued into negative $u$. Since $dt/d\theta =1/(l{u}^2)$ and $u$ has a simple zero, reaching infinity takes infinite time. As a check, the specific potential energy is $\Phi (r)=-3/r-9/(2r^2)$ and the conserved energy per unit mass is $4^2/2+\Phi (1)=1/2$, giving escape speed $1$ at infinity, also obtained from $-l{u}^{\prime }(8\pi /3)=1$.

Put $V=|v_0|>0$, take $q>0$ without loss of generality, and write $s=R^2+z^2/q^2$. The Newtonian gravitational potential is singular at the origin; all pointwise claims below concern $s>0$. The zero of the Newtonian gravitational potential is the one in the paper, with an implicit fixed length unit inside the logarithm.

The Poisson equation for Newtonian gravity in cylindrical coordinates givesThe two contributions to the Laplacian areConsequently the mass density of the axisymmetric logarithmic gravitational potential isThe coefficient of $R^2$ is positive. The coefficient of $z^2$ determines the density positivity for an axisymmetric logarithmic potential: strict positivity at every noncentral point requires $q^2>1/2$ and $v_0\ne 0$. Nonnegativity permits $q^2=1/2$, where the mass density vanishes on the noncentral symmetry axis. For $q^2<1/2$ it is negative near that axis. Either sign of a nonzero real $q$ gives the same model, and $q=0$ is undefined. Setting $v_0=0$ yields vacuum away from the singular origin, not strictly positive mass density. The $r^{-2}$ central cusp is locally integrable and contains no hidden point mass: the Newtonian gravitational field flux through a shrinking sphere is of order its radius.

An equatorial circular orbit requires inward gravitational acceleration equal to $v_c^2/R$. Thus the circular speed isThis is a flat galaxy rotation curve. The singular center does not define an additional circular orbit at $R=0$.

The specific orbital energy $E=\frac{1}{2}(v_R^2+v_{\varphi }^2+v_z^2)+\Phi$ is conserved because the Newtonian gravitational potential is time independent. The axial specific angular momentum $L_z=R{v}_{\varphi }$ is conserved because the Newtonian gravitational potential is axisymmetric. Hence the Jeans theorem, or directly $dF(E,L_z^2)/dt=0$ in the Collisionless Boltzmann equation, permits a stationary two-integral galactic distribution function. Using $L_z^2$ makes this galactic distribution function even under reversal of the azimuthal velocity, so it describes a nonstreaming population. A general axisymmetric population can have an odd part in $L_z$, or dependence on a third integral of motion; neither is required for this construction.

At each position define $\rho ⟨g⟩=\int gF{d}^{3}v$. The two-integral galactic distribution function is invariant under swapping $v_R$ and $v_z$, since only their sum of squares occurs in $E$. It is also even in each velocity component. Swapping integration variables proves meridional velocity isotropy of a two-integral distribution, while reflecting one variable makes each mixed integrand odd. ThereforeAll mean velocities vanish, so these are also the corresponding statements for the velocity ellipsoid and its centered covariance tensor. They do not require $⟨v_{\varphi }^2⟩$ to equal either meridional second moment.

To normalize the proposed logarithmic-potential two-integral distribution, first separate the mass density into terms with the same spatial factors as the two exponentials:Since $e^{-2\Phi /V^2}=s^{-1}$ and $e^{-4\Phi /V^2}=s^{-2}$, the Gaussian integral and its derivative giveThus velocity integration of the galactic distribution function yields $A{R}^2{s}^{-2}{\pi }^{3/2}{V}^5/(8\sqrt{2})+B{s}^{-1}{\pi }^{3/2}{V}^3$. Matching the independent spatial factors determinesThis verifies both the stationary Collisionless Boltzmann equation and the required Poisson equation for Newtonian gravity. A shift $\Phi \mapsto \Phi +C$ changes the normalizations to $A{e}^{4C/V^2}$ and $B{e}^{2C/V^2}$; the physical mass density is unchanged.

There is an important distinction between positive mass density and a nonnegative galactic distribution function. For $1/2\le q^2\le 1$, both coefficients above are nonnegative. For a prolate model $q^2>1$, $A<0$ and one must test the sum rather than reject the model just because one term is negative. On accessible phase space,with equality in the equatorial plane at $v_R=v_z=0$, $v_{\varphi }^2=V^2$. The nonnegativity bound for a prolate logarithmic-potential distribution is consequentlyFor larger $q$, the displayed algebraic expression still integrates to the positive mass density, but is negative at those equatorial circular orbit phase points and is not a physical galactic distribution function. This extra restriction is distinct from the earlier density-only answer.