Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 44 references

Area and Perimeter Rules of Velocity Circulation in Two-Dimensional Turbulence with Large-scale Absolute Equilibrium

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read At 2D turbulence equilibrium, circulation obeys a new perimeter rule

desk verdict Solid empirical demonstration of area/perimeter rules in 2D absolute equilibrium, but the perimeter rule's status as a steady solution of the loop equation is not proven as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.05617 v1 pith:4J45WNFH submitted 2026-08-06 physics.flu-dyn

Zi-Ang Zhang , Jin-Han Xie This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.flu-dyn MSC 76F0276F05 PACS 47.27.-i47.27.Gs
keywords velocitycirculationloopequationarearuleperimetertwo-dimensionalturbulenceabsoluteequilibriumenstrophyequipartitionenergy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper establishes exact geometric laws for the probability distribution of velocity circulation in two-dimensional turbulence at large-scale absolute equilibrium. It shows that under enstrophy equipartition the circulation variance over a loop is proportional to the loop's enclosed area, making the classic area rule strictly true, whereas under energy equipartition the variance is proportional to the loop's perimeter, a previously unknown perimeter rule. The perimeter rule is derived as a steady solution of the 2D inviscid loop equation and is confirmed numerically, with moment ratios over rectangular versus square loops agreeing to within 1% even for aspect ratios as low as 0.03. A characteristic equilibrium scale separates the two regimes: smaller loops follow the area rule and larger loops follow the perimeter rule. A sympathetic reader should care because these are rare exact statements about a turbulence invariant, and they suggest that other geometric invariants may exist.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the coarse-grained loop perimeter $L_{C,\rho} = \sqrt{2\pi}\,\rho \oint_C \oint_C \delta_{ij} G_\rho(x-x')\, dx_i\, dx'_j$, defined by a double line integral against the Gaussian kernel $G_\rho(r) = \exp(-r^2/(2\rho^2))/(2\pi\rho^2)$. Its area derivatives with respect to the loop, $\delta L_{C,\rho}/\delta\sigma(x)$ and $\delta^2 L_{C,\rho}/\delta\sigma(x)\,\delta\sigma(x')$, are computed explicitly, and the proof that $P=F(L_{C,\rho},\Gamma)$ is a steady solution reduces to showing that two integrals, $I_{C,\rho}$ and $J_{C,\rho}$, both vanish. $I_{C,\rho}$ vanishes because its integrand is a gradient of a function of $r$, while $J_{C,\rho}$ is argued to vanish by integration by parts plus the closed-loop identity $\oint_C d\psi=0$. The absolute-equilibrium spectra $E(k)=2\pi k/(\alpha+\beta k^2)$ provide the physical setting in which the relevant variances collapse cleanly onto area or perimeter.

What would settle it

Numerically evaluate $J_{C,\rho} = \oint_C \int\!\int (r_i/r^2) (\delta L_{C,\rho}/\delta\sigma(x))(\delta L_{C,\rho}/\delta\sigma(x'))\, d\sigma(x')\, dx_i$ for a circle of radius $R$ with $\rho$ small, computing the integral over $s''$ exactly without interchanging it with the integral over the loop; a nonzero result would show that $P=F(L_{C,\rho},\Gamma)$ is not a steady solution. A complementary experiment would measure circulation variances over loops of identical perimeter but different shapes in a simulation at higher Reynolds number closer to condensation; any departure from a ratio of 1 would refute the perimeter rule in that regime.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that in the large-scale absolute equilibrium of 2D homogeneous isotropic turbulence, the circulation PDF is determined by a single geometric functional of the loop: the enclosed area in the enstrophy-equipartition regime and the perimeter in the energy-equipartition regime. Concretely, using a Gaussian coarse-graining at scale $\rho$, the variance satisfies $\langle \Gamma_C^2 \rangle = A_{C,\rho}/\beta$ for the area rule and $\langle \Gamma_C^2 \rangle = L_{C,\rho}/(\sqrt{2\pi}\,\rho\,\alpha)$ for the perimeter rule, so the PDF itself is Gaussian with those variances. The paper proves that any PDF of the form $F(L_{C,\rho},\Gamma)$ is a steady solution of the 2D inviscid loop equation, providing the first steady solution beyond the area rule. In forced-dissipative simulations with Reynolds numbers from 3.5 to 4.04, the absolute-equilibrium spectra and Gaussian velocity statistics hold, and circulation moments over rectangular versus square loops of equal perimeter or area agree within 1%, with scaling exponents $\zeta_p=p$ in the area regime and $\zeta_p=p/2$ in the perimeter regime.

Load-bearing premise

The perimeter-rule proof requires taking the Gaussian kernel out of a loop integral even though the kernel's argument depends on the loop coordinate, and it assumes a smooth loop while the numerical tests use rectangles with corners.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the perimeter rule is correct, circulation statistics in the energy-equipartition regime are shape-independent for fixed perimeter, so highly elongated loops and compact loops of equal perimeter share the same distribution.
  • The area rule, long known to fail in the inertial range, is restored as an exact law in the enstrophy-equipartition regime, giving a concrete turbulent state where the earlier idea is valid.
  • The two regimes are separated by a characteristic equilibrium scale $l_\text{eq}$; normalizing loop sizes by $l_\text{eq}$ collapses data across different Reynolds numbers.
  • Scaling exponents of circulation moments are exactly $p$ in the area regime and $p/2$ in the perimeter regime, with no intermittency, consistent with Gaussian field statistics.
  • The existence of a perimeter-rule steady solution suggests that the loop equation admits other solutions characterized by geometric functionals beyond area, such as a functional tied to a fractional power of the Laplacian.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The derivation of the vanishing of $J_{C,\rho}$ removes the Gaussian kernel $G_\rho(\xi)$ from an integral over the loop parameter $s''$ even though $\xi$ depends on $s''$; until this interchange is justified or replaced by a limiting argument, the perimeter rule should be regarded as a numerically supported conjecture rather than a fully closed proof.
  • A direct computation of $J_{C,\rho}$ for a circle or a square, without the questionable interchange, would settle the rigor question and could reveal finite-resolution corrections of order $\rho/L$.
  • The observed robustness down to aspect ratio 0.03 raises the possibility that the inertial-range failure of the area rule might partly be a crossover to a perimeter-dominated regime, which would connect this equilibrium result to inertial-range circulation statistics.
  • The same canonical-ensemble logic applied to 3D homogeneous isotropic turbulence with a Rayleigh-Jeans spectrum predicts an analogous geometric rule with a different loop functional; this is testable in the same forced-dissipative setup.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This letter studies velocity-circulation statistics in the large-scale absolute equilibrium of two-dimensional turbulence. Using Gaussian correlations for the truncated Euler ensemble, the authors derive that the circulation variance is proportional to the coarse-grained loop area under enstrophy equipartition and to the coarse-grained loop perimeter under energy equipartition, and they obtain the corresponding Gaussian PDFs. They verify these area and perimeter rules in direct numerical simulations of forced-dissipative 2D turbulence over a range of Reynolds numbers, including rectangular loops with aspect ratios as small as 0.03, and they report scaling exponents ζ_p=p and ζ_p=p/2 in the two regimes. The paper further claims that the perimeter-rule form P=F(L_{C,ρ},Γ) is a new steady solution of the two-dimensional inviscid loop equation, derived in the End Matter.

Significance. The equilibrium area and perimeter laws are clean and, if correct, provide exact geometric statements about circulation statistics in a realizable setting, complementing the approximate area rule of the inertial range. The numerical evidence is honestly presented: moment ratios collapse to within 1% for extreme aspect ratios, scaling exponents are fitted without intermittency, and the supplementary convergence check of the 10th-order moment integrand supports statistical sufficiency. The variance formulas from Gaussian correlations are derived transparently. However, the advertised new steady solution of the loop equation rests on a conditional-convergence argument that is not currently justified; until that proof is repaired, the headline theoretical claim should be regarded as formal. The equilibrium results themselves are independently supported by the Gaussian derivation and DNS.

major comments (3)
  1. [End Matter, Eqs. (33)-(38)] The step 'assuming that we can change the order of integration' is load-bearing and is not justified as written. The area integral ζρ = ∫ sin(θ''+θ−2γ)/r² Gρ(ξ) dσ′ is only conditionally convergent near r=0: the angular average of the numerator vanishes, but ∫ |sin(...)|/r² dσ′ diverges logarithmically. Moreover, for fixed ξ the function ψ(s'') has a pole at the point where x''(s'') = x(s)−ξ, so the closed-loop integral ∮ dψ is not obviously zero unless a principal value is defined. No UV regulator or PV prescription is given. This leaves the statement that P=F(L_{C,ρ},Γ) is an exact steady solution of the inviscid loop equation as a formal calculation, not an established result. Please either supply a regularized version (e.g., a cutoff ε around r=0 with a proof that the residual vanishes) or explicitly state that the solution is formal.
  2. [Eqs. (6)-(7) and End Matter Eq. (26)] The prefactor in the definition of L_{C,ρ} is inconsistent with the claimed convergence to the perimeter. With the displayed definition L_{C,ρ} = √(2πρ) ∮∮ δ_ij Gρ dx_i dx'_j and Gρ=(2πρ²)^{-1}exp(-r²/(2ρ²)), a straight side of length a contributes a/√ρ, so L_{C,ρ} diverges as ρ→0 rather than converging to L_C. The asymptotic expansion in Eq. (26) uses a prefactor 1/(√(2π)ρ) inside the double integral, which corresponds to L_{C,ρ} = √(2π)ρ ∮∮ δ_ij Gρ dx_i dx'_j. Correspondingly, the variance formula in Eq. (6) should have denominator √(2π)ρ, not √(2πρ). Please correct the prefactor throughout and re-check the dimensions of all formulas that use L_{C,ρ}.
  3. [Supplementary Material, Eqs. (10)-(11)] The area-rule proof also contains an unregularized singular integral. After exchanging the order of integration, the loop integral ∮ κ r_i/(2πr²) dx_i is logarithmically divergent near r=0 along the loop (r∼s), and the statement that it converges to zero when multiplied by ρ requires a principal-value definition and a control of the ρ→0 limit. This is separate from the Gaussian-equilibrium argument, which is sound, but it is another place where a proof of a steady solution of the loop equation is formal as written.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figs. 2-3] Please define l_eq explicitly (presumably 2π/k_eq) before its first use in the figures; the text only defines k_eq = √(α/β).
  2. [Eq. (15)] The notation X_C ∝ ∫∫ (−∇²)^{−1/3} δ(x−x′) dσ dσ′ introduces a fractional Laplacian acting on a delta function; the precise definition and regularization of this singular kernel should be given.
  3. [End Matter and Numerical Tests] The theoretical proof assumes a smooth non-self-intersecting loop with the local expansion in Eq. (25), while the numerical tests use rectangular loops with corners. A sentence explaining why the corner contributions vanish in the ρ→0 limit, or why rectangles can be approximated by smooth loops, would remove this mismatch.
  4. [Fig. 3 caption] There is a typo in 'veolcity'; the caption should also state the color coding for the curves in panels (b) and (c).
  5. [General] A statement on data and code availability would be useful, since the simulations use the public GeophysicalFlows.jl package and the moment-ratio results could be reproduced exactly only with the run parameters.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular reduction: the area and perimeter rules follow from Gaussian absolute-equilibrium correlations, and the loop-equation proof treats F as arbitrary rather than fitting it to data.

full rationale

The central claims are derived from the absolute-equilibrium correlations and the loop equation, not from the circulation data being 'predicted.' Under enstrophy equipartition, the vorticity correlation ⟨ω(x)ω(x')⟩=Gρ(r)/β makes ⟨Γ_C²⟩=A_C,ρ/β, so the Gaussian circulation PDF depends only on the regularized area; under energy equipartition, the velocity correlation ⟨u_i(x)u_j(x')⟩=δ_ij Gρ(r)/α makes ⟨Γ_C²⟩=L_C,ρ/(√(2π)ρα), so the PDF depends only on the regularized perimeter. These are consequences of the stated Gaussian statistics, not identities imposed by definition of the rules. The perimeter-rule proof substitutes P=F(L_C,ρ,Γ) into the loop equation; F is arbitrary, and the claimed vanishing of J_C,ρ via ∮ dψ=0 is an exact-solution verification, not a fit of F to measured circulations. The Lagrange multipliers α and β are fitted to spectra only to locate l_eq; they drop out of the square-vs-rectangle variance and moment ratios, so no predicted ratio is forced by a fitted circulation value. Refs [12] and [31] are self-citations but are background context, not load-bearing for the new equilibrium laws; the equilibrium state is benchmarked against Kraichnan spectra and van Kan et al., and Gaussianity is checked numerically. The End-Matter step from Eq (35) to Eq (38) involves an interchange of a conditionally convergent area integral with the closed-loop integral around the r=0 singularity; if that interchange fails, the perimeter rule is not established as a steady solution, but this is a mathematical rigor gap, not a circularity. No prediction reduces by construction to an input, and no uniqueness theorem from the authors is invoked. Score 1 reflects only the minor background self-citations and the formal gap; the derivation is otherwise self-contained.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claims rest on the standard truncated-Euler equilibrium assumption, Gaussian statistics, and the smooth-loop expansion. The proof of the new perimeter rule additionally depends on an unjustified integration step in the End Matter. No new physical entities are required except a speculative inertial-range geometric functional X_C.

free parameters (2)
  • Lagrange multiplier α = from least-squares fit of E(k) to Eq. (1), exact value not reported
    Sets the equilibrium spectrum and l_eq = sqrt(α/β); used to normalize circulation in Figs. 2 and 3 but cancels in the central moment-ratio comparisons.
  • Lagrange multiplier β = from least-squares fit of E(k) to Eq. (1), exact value not reported
    Sets the equilibrium spectrum and l_eq; used to define the boundary between area-rule and perimeter-rule regimes.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Truncated 2D Euler equations reach a canonical absolute equilibrium with Kraichnan spectra E(k) = 2πk/(α+βk²).
    Invoked in Eq. (1) and throughout; this is the statistical-mechanical foundation on which both rules are derived.
  • standard math A Gaussian random field yields a Gaussian distribution for circulation with variance given by the double integrals in Eq. (5).
    Used to obtain the explicit PDFs in Eq. (10) and the Gaussian moment relations in Fig. 3.
  • ad hoc to paper Smooth non-self-intersecting loops admit the local expansion in Eq. (25) used to show L_{C,ρ} converges to the perimeter.
    The asymptotic expansion in Eq. (26) is derived for smooth loops, but the numerical tests use rectangular loops with corners.
  • ad hoc to paper The integration over s'' in Eq. (36) through Eq. (38) can be performed with Gρ(ξ) treated as independent of s'' when evaluating ∮dψ.
    This step is not justified in the text; Gρ(ξ) depends on s'' through ξ, so ∫Gρ dψ over a closed loop does not automatically vanish.
invented entities (1)
  • X_C, a geometric functional for the inertial range defined via (−∇²)^{−1/3}
    purpose: Speculative extension of the area and perimeter rules to inertial-range enstrophy spectra with ⟨|ω|²⟩ ∝ k^{−2/3}.
    Introduced in Eq. (15) as an analogy; no derivation, measurement, or numerical support is provided in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Area and Perimeter Rules of Velocity Circulation in Two-Dimensional Turbulence with Large-scale Absolute Equilibrium." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4J45WNFH

@misc{pith2026260805617,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Area and Perimeter Rules of Velocity Circulation in Two-Dimensional Turbulence with Large-scale Absolute Equilibrium},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4J45WNFH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.05617}
}
abstract

We demonstrate that the area rule of velocity circulation -- traditionally associated with the turbulent inertial range but shown not to be exact -- is strictly satisfied in the large-scale absolute equilibrium of two-dimensional (2D) homogeneous isotropic turbulence under enstrophy equipartition. We also derive a novel perimeter rule from the 2D inviscid loop equation, which posits that the probability distribution function (PDF) of velocity circulation depends solely on the loop perimeter rather than its area. This perimeter rule holds strictly in the large-scale absolute equilibrium characterized by energy equipartition. At the intermediate states determined by both enstrophy and energy, these two regimes are separated by a characteristic equilibrium scale $l_\text{eq}$: the area rule governs loop statistics when $l\ll l_\text{eq}$, while the perimeter rule emerges for $l\gg l_\text{eq}$. These statistical laws remain robust even for loops with extreme aspect ratios as low as $0.03$, a value that inertial-range studies never achieved. Our findings provide a new steady-state solution to the 2D loop equation and suggest additional solutions, paving the way for exploring previously undiscovered geometric invariants of turbulence.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.05617 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Energy spectra for runs with different Reynolds [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) Scaling exponents [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. ). x x ′ x ′′ ξ r t t ′′ C θ γ θ ′′ FIG. 4. Illustrative plot of the angles θ, θ′′, γ and vectors ti, t′′ i , ri, ξi. The boundary term vanishes since Gρ decays expo￾nentially as x ′ i goes to infinity. For a fixed smooth loop, θ, θ′′, γ and r are all smooth functions about s, s′′ and ξi . Considering ∂γ ∂s′′ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    V. I. Arnold, A. Weinstein, and K. Vogtmann,Mathemat- ical Methods Of Classical Mechanics, 2nd ed., Graduate Texts in Mathematics (Springer, 1989)

    work page 1989

  2. [2]

    Wu, H.-Y

    J.-Z. Wu, H.-Y. Ma, and M.-D. Zhou,Vortical Flows (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2015)

    work page 2015

  3. [3]

    V. I. Arnold and B. A. Khesin,Topological Methods in Hydrodynamics, Applied Mathematical Sciences, Vol. 125 (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2021)

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Frisch,Turbulence, paperback ed

    U. Frisch,Turbulence, paperback ed. (Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 1995)

    work page 1995

  5. [5]

    S. Chen, G. L. Eyink, M. Wan, and Z. Xiao, Physical Review Letters97, 144505 (2006)

    work page 2006

  6. [6]

    K. G. Wilson, Physical Review D10, 2445 (1974)

    1974

  7. [7]

    A. A. Migdal, International Journal of Modern Physics A09, 1197 (1994), arXiv:hep-th/9310088

    arXiv 1994

  8. [8]

    Migdal, Universal Area Law in Turbulence (2019), arXiv:1903.08613 [hep-th]

    A. Migdal, Universal Area Law in Turbulence (2019), arXiv:1903.08613 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2019

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    Umeki, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan62, 3788 (1993)

    M. Umeki, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan62, 3788 (1993)

    1993

  2. [10]

    N. Cao, S. Chen, and K. R. Sreenivasan, Physical Review Letters76, 616 (1996)

    1996

  3. [11]

    K. P. Iyer, K. R. Sreenivasan, and P. K. Yeung, Physical Review X9, 041006 (2019). 5

    2019

  4. [12]

    Zhu, J.-H

    H.-Y. Zhu, J.-H. Xie, and K.-Q. Xia, Physical Review Letters130, 214001 (2023)

    2023

  5. [13]

    N. P. M¨ uller, J. I. Polanco, and G. Krstulovic, Physical Review X11, 011053 (2021)

    2021

  6. [14]

    J. I. Polanco, N. P. M¨ uller, and G. Krstulovic, Nature Communications12, 7090 (2021)

    2021

  7. [15]

    N. P. M¨ uller and G. Krstulovic, Physical Review Letters 132, 094002 (2024)

    2024

  8. [16]

    Massaro, S.-H

    M. Massaro, S.-H. Shinn, M. Thudiyangal, and A. del Campo, Circulation Statistics and Migdal Area Rule Be- yond the Kibble-Zurek Mechanism in a Newborn Bose- Einstein Condensate (2025), arXiv:2508.11047 [cond- mat]

    2025 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Kolmogorov, Akademiia Nauk SSSR Doklady30, 301 (1941)

    A. Kolmogorov, Akademiia Nauk SSSR Doklady30, 301 (1941)

    1941

  10. [18]

    Frisch, P.-L

    U. Frisch, P.-L. Sulem, and M. Nelkin, Journal of Fluid Mechanics87, 719 (1978)

    1978

  11. [19]

    B. B. Mandelbrot, Journal of Fluid Mechanics62, 331 (1974)

    1974

  12. [20]

    Benzi, G

    R. Benzi, G. Paladin, G. Parisi, and A. Vulpiani, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General17, 3521 (1984)

    1984

  13. [21]

    K. R. Sreenivasan and R. A. Antonia, Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics29, 435 (1997)

    1997

  14. [22]

    C. Sun, Z. Quan, and X. Ke-Qing, Physical Review Let- ters97, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.144504 (2006)

    2006 doi

  15. [23]

    Meneveau and K

    C. Meneveau and K. R. Sreenivasan, Physical Review Letters59, 1424 (1987)

    1987

  16. [24]

    She and E

    Z.-S. She and E. Leveque, Physical Review Letters72, 336 (1994)

    1994

  17. [25]

    Yakhot, Physical Review E63, 026307 (2001)

    V. Yakhot, Physical Review E63, 026307 (2001)

    2001

  18. [26]

    Biferale, G

    L. Biferale, G. Boffetta, A. Celani, B. J. Devenish, A. Lanotte, and F. Toschi, Physical Review Letters93, 064502 (2004)

    2004

  19. [27]

    S. Chen, K. R. Sreenivasan, M. Nelkin, and N. Cao, Phys- ical Review Letters79, 2253 (1997)

    1997

  20. [28]

    Grossmann, D

    S. Grossmann, D. Lohse, and A. Reeh, Physics of Fluids 9, 3817 (1997)

    1997

  21. [29]

    Boffetta, A

    G. Boffetta, A. Celani, and M. Vergassola, Physical Re- view E61, R29 (2000)

    2000

  22. [30]

    K. P. Iyer, S. S. Bharadwaj, and K. R. Sreenivasan, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences118, e2114679118 (2021)

    2021

  23. [31]

    Xie and J.-H

    B.-J. Xie and J.-H. Xie, Area rule of velocity circulation in two-dimensional instability-driven turbulence beyond the inertial range (2025), arXiv:2504.21512 [physics]

    2025

  24. [32]

    T. D. Lee, Journal of Applied Physics22, 524 (1951)

    1951

  25. [33]

    R. H. Kraichnan, The Physics of Fluids10, 1417 (1967)

    1967

  26. [34]

    R. H. Kraichnan, Journal of Fluid Mechanics67, 155 (1975)

    1975

  27. [35]

    Gorce and E

    J.-B. Gorce and E. Falcon, Physical Review Letters129, 054501 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    Dallas, S

    V. Dallas, S. Fauve, and A. Alexakis, Physical Review Letters115, 204501 (2015)

    2015

  29. [37]

    R. H. Kraichnan, Journal of Fluid Mechanics59, 745 (1973)

    1973

  30. [38]

    Migdal, Scaling Indexα= 1/2 In Turbulent Area Law (2019), arXiv:1904.00900 [hep-th]

    A. Migdal, Scaling Indexα= 1/2 In Turbulent Area Law (2019), arXiv:1904.00900 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  31. [39]

    van Kan, A

    A. van Kan, A. Alexakis, and E. Knobloch, Two- dimensional turbulent condensates without bottom drag (2025), arXiv:2504.02978 [physics]

    2025 arXiv

  32. [40]

    N. C. Constantinou, G. L. Wagner, L. Siegelman, B. C. Pearson, and A. Pal´ oczy, Journal of Open Source Soft- ware6, 3053 (2021)

    2021

  33. [41]

    N. C. Constantinou, G. L. Wagner, A. Pal´ oczy, K. W. HO, J. Bisits, J. TagBot, M. Piibeleht, T. Besard, C. Robertson, and V. Parfenyev, Fourier- Flows/FourierFlows.jl: V0.10.7, Zenodo (2025)

    2025

  34. [42]

    T. S. Lundgren and Y. B. Pointin, Journal of Statistical Physics17, 323 (1977)

    1977

  35. [43]

    Gauthier, M

    G. Gauthier, M. T. Reeves, X. Yu, A. S. Bradley, M. A. Baker, T. A. Bell, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, M. J. Davis, and T. W. Neely, Science364, 1264 (2019)

    2019

  36. [44]

    Area and Perimeter Rules of Velocity Circulation in Two-Dimensional Turbulence with Large-scale Absolute Equilibrium

    W. Agoua, X.-Y. Yin, T. Wu, and W. J. T. Bos, Physical Review Fluids10, 034604 (2025). 6 END MA TTER 2D LOOP EQUA TION For a fixed Eulerian loopCin 2D space, the PDF of velocity circulation can be expressed as P(C, Γ, t) = δ Γ− I C u·dx ,(16) whose partial derivatives give ∂2P...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.