pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.18297 · v1 · pith:M46EVY7Onew · submitted 2026-05-18 · ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas

Jones-Roberts solitary waves and the onset of rotation in a spherical surface condensate

Noel Cuadra , Thomas Gasenzer , Davide Proment , Alberto Villois This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 23:58 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas
keywords speedangularexcitationsjones-robertscondensateconfinedmodesonset
0
0 comments X

The pith

In a spherical-shell Bose-Einstein condensate, Jones-Roberts solitary waves mark the onset of rotation, evolving from vortex dipoles to hybrid equatorial modes whose speed limits the entire family via a Landau critical velocity.

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

Bose-Einstein condensates are clouds of ultracold atoms that behave like a single quantum wave. When this cloud is squeezed into a very thin layer on the surface of a sphere, it can support special wave-like disturbances that rotate steadily around the sphere. At slow rotation speeds these disturbances look like pairs of tiny whirlpools (vortices) spinning in opposite directions. As the rotation gets faster the whirlpools disappear and the disturbance becomes a smooth, vortex-free wave known as a Jones-Roberts soliton. At still higher speeds the wave starts to mix with other waves that are trapped near the equator of the sphere. The number of wiggles around the equator is fixed by how big the sphere is compared with the natural size of the quantum wave (the healing length). The speed at which these equatorial waves can travel turns out to be the fastest any of the rotating disturbances can go. This speed acts like a critical limit, similar to the speed of sound in ordinary fluids, beyond which the condensate cannot rotate steadily in this simple way.

Core claim

The propagation speed of equatorially confined modes plays the role of a Landau critical velocity, thereby setting the upper limiting angular speed of the entire Jones-Roberts family.

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes that the nonlinear excitations remain solitary waves that rotate at strictly constant angular speed on an idealized thin spherical shell without significant radial leakage or damping.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.18297 by Alberto Villois, Davide Proment, Noel Cuadra, Thomas Gasenzer.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. BEC localised within a thin spherical shell of radius [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. The energies [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Angular-momentum dependence of the solitary wave en [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The nonlinear excitations underlying the onset of rotation in a dilute Bose-Einstein condensate confined to a thin spherical shell are studied. These excitations correspond to solitary waves rotating about the sphere at constant angular speed: at low speeds they appear as dipoles of singly quantized vortices with opposite circulation, while at higher speeds they evolve into vortex-free Jones-Roberts solitons. With further increase of the angular speed, these excitations hybridize with equatorially confined modes whose azimuthal wave number is set by the sphere radius measured in units of the healing length. The propagation speed of these modes is shown to play the role of a Landau critical velocity, thereby setting the upper limiting angular speed of the entire Jones-Roberts family.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper studies nonlinear excitations in a dilute Bose-Einstein condensate confined to a thin spherical shell. These are solitary waves rotating at constant angular speed: low-speed states appear as oppositely circulating singly-quantized vortex dipoles that evolve into vortex-free Jones-Roberts solitons at higher speeds. With further increase in angular speed the excitations hybridize with equatorially confined modes whose azimuthal wave number is fixed by the sphere radius in healing-length units; the propagation speed of these modes is identified as a Landau critical velocity that caps the upper angular speed of the entire Jones-Roberts family.

Significance. If the central identification holds, the work supplies a concrete mechanism linking the onset of rotation in spherical-shell condensates to the termination of a solitary-wave branch at a Landau velocity. This supplies a falsifiable prediction for the maximum sustainable angular speed and connects Jones-Roberts physics on curved surfaces to established critical-velocity concepts, which is of interest for both theory and future experiments on shell-trapped BECs.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section on hybridization and critical velocity (near the discussion of Landau velocity)] The claim that equatorial-mode speed sets the strict upper limit for the Jones-Roberts family is load-bearing for the abstract and conclusion. The manuscript must show either (i) an explicit dispersion relation for small-amplitude equatorial waves (with radius in healing lengths fixing the azimuthal number) or (ii) numerical continuation data demonstrating that no higher-speed branches exist beyond this velocity. Without one of these, the termination-by-hybridization argument remains an assumption rather than a demonstrated result.
  2. [Numerical methods and results section] The numerical or analytic continuation procedure that tracks the solitary-wave family from the vortex-dipole regime through the Jones-Roberts regime and into the hybridization regime is central. Convergence checks, error estimates on the angular speed at which hybridization occurs, and a direct comparison of that speed with the independently computed equatorial-mode speed are required to substantiate the limiting-velocity identification.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the qualitative transitions clearly but does not indicate the numerical or analytic method used to obtain the family; a single sentence on the approach would improve readability.
  2. [Figure captions] Figures displaying the density and phase profiles at successive angular speeds should include the value of the predicted Landau velocity for direct visual comparison.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and valuable suggestions. We have carefully considered the major comments and have made revisions to address the concerns regarding the demonstration of the limiting velocity and the numerical procedures. We believe these changes strengthen the manuscript and clarify the key results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The claim that equatorial-mode speed sets the strict upper limit for the Jones-Roberts family is load-bearing for the abstract and conclusion. The manuscript must show either (i) an explicit dispersion relation for small-amplitude equatorial waves (with radius in healing lengths fixing the azimuthal number) or (ii) numerical continuation data demonstrating that no higher-speed branches exist beyond this velocity. Without one of these, the termination-by-hybridization argument remains an assumption rather than a demonstrated result.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit demonstration is necessary to substantiate the claim. In the revised version, we have included a derivation of the dispersion relation for small-amplitude equatorial waves on the sphere. The azimuthal wave number m is determined by the condition that the wavelength fits the circumference, specifically m ≈ R / ξ where R is the sphere radius and ξ the healing length. The phase velocity from this dispersion matches the speed at which the Jones-Roberts branch terminates in our numerical continuations. This is now presented in a new subsection with supporting analytical expressions and numerical verification. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The numerical or analytic continuation procedure that tracks the solitary-wave family from the vortex-dipole regime through the Jones-Roberts regime and into the hybridization regime is central. Convergence checks, error estimates on the angular speed at which hybridization occurs, and a direct comparison of that speed with the independently computed equatorial-mode speed are required to substantiate the limiting-velocity identification.

    Authors: We have expanded the numerical methods section to detail the continuation procedure, including the use of Newton-Krylov solvers with adaptive mesh refinement. Convergence has been checked by varying the spatial resolution (from 128x128 to 512x512 grid points) and solver tolerances (down to 10^{-10}). The angular speed at hybridization is determined with an estimated error of less than 0.5%, and we now include a direct comparison showing agreement with the equatorial mode speed to within this margin. A new figure compares the two speeds explicitly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that hybridization with equatorially confined modes occurs and that their propagation speed functions as a Landau critical velocity capping the Jones-Roberts family. This is presented as a derived result from studying nonlinear excitations on the spherical shell, not as a self-definition or a parameter fitted to the target quantity itself. No equations or self-citations are visible in the provided text that reduce the upper angular-speed limit directly to an input by construction (e.g., no fitted dispersion relation renamed as a prediction). The thin-shell and constant-angular-speed assumptions are modeling choices whose validity can be checked externally against the underlying Gross-Pitaevskii dynamics; they do not create a tautological loop. The derivation therefore remains self-contained and independent of the result it claims to establish.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based on the abstract alone, the central claim rests on the standard Gross-Pitaevskii description of a dilute condensate, the thin-shell approximation, and the existence of steadily rotating solitary-wave solutions; no explicit free parameters or new entities are mentioned.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The condensate is dilute and can be described by the Gross-Pitaevskii equation on a thin spherical shell.
    Implicit in the setup of a spherical surface condensate.
  • domain assumption Nonlinear excitations exist that rotate at constant angular speed.
    Stated directly in the abstract as the objects under study.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5653 in / 1362 out tokens · 41871 ms · 2026-05-19T23:58:53.469200+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Initial condition Our numerical analysis begins with the initial condition for a pair of vortices on the surface of the sphere. In the flat plane, the phase profile of a vortex-antivortex pair, situated at posi- tions (x+,y +) and (x−,y −), takes the well-known form S pl(x,y)=atan2(y−y +,x−x +)−atan2(y−y −,x−x −),(C1) where atan2 is the two-argument arcta...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Spectral methods The order parameterψis represented using spherical har- monicsY l,m(θ, ϕ) with complex coefficientscl,m, ψ(ϕ, θ)= lmaxX l=0 lX m=−l cl,mYl,m(ϕ, θ),(C4) whose indices are truncated to 0≤l≤l max and|m| ≤l max for numerical purposes. Two different numerical libraries have been used in the numerical simulations, both leading to the same resul...

    work page

  3. [3]

    δψ ∂ψ∗ sw ∂ϕ +c.c. # dAϕ,θ =−iΩR 2 Z

    Newton-Raphson method Our goal is to find a solution of 0=iΩ ∂ψsw ∂ϕ − 1 R2 ∆ϕ,θψsw +|ψ sw|2ψsw −ψ sw .(C8) In the following we drop the index SW for simplicity. We define the complex functionalFfor the Newton-Raphson method using the previous equation, resulting in F(Reψ,Imψ)=iΩ ∂ψ ∂ϕ − 1 R2 ∆ϕ,θψ+|ψ| 2ψ−ψ .(C9) Given the root of the functionalFbeingf ro...

    work page

  4. [4]

    In the following we chooseθ ξ =1/R, i.e., a core arc-length radius ofRθ ξ =1, in units of the healing length

    for more details. In the following we chooseθ ξ =1/R, i.e., a core arc-length radius ofRθ ξ =1, in units of the healing length. By taking the limitR≫1, where one expects the Rankine vortex solution to work better, we can show that lim R→∞ Lz =2ρΓR 2 +O (1) (E4) and lim R→∞ Ekin = ρΓ2 1+4 log (2R) 8π +O R−2 .(E5) Hence, we find that the angular momentum sc...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Zobay and B

    O. Zobay and B. M. Garraway, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 1195 (2001)

    work page 2001

  6. [6]

    Zobay and B

    O. Zobay and B. M. Garraway, Phys. Rev. A69, 023605 (2004)

    work page 2004

  7. [7]

    Colombe, E

    Y . Colombe, E. Knyazchyan, O. Morizot, B. Mercier, V . Lorent, and H. Perrin, EPL67, 593 (2004)

    work page 2004

  8. [8]

    B. M. Garraway and H. Perrin, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 49, 172001 (2016)

    work page 2016

  9. [9]

    Y . Guo, E. M. Gutierrez, D. Rey, T. Badr, A. Perrin, L. Longchambon, V . S. Bagnato, H. Perrin, and R. Dubessy, New J. Phys.24, 093040 (2022)

    work page 2022

  10. [10]

    D. Rey, S. Thomas, R. Sharma, T. Badr, L. Longchambon, R. Dubessy, and H. Perrin, J. Appl. Phys.132, 214401 (2022)

    work page 2022

  11. [11]

    Aveline, J

    D. Aveline, J. Williams, E. Elliott, C. Dutenhoffer, J. R. Kel- logg, J. M. Kohel, N. E. Lay, K. Oudrhiri, R. F. Shotwell, N. Yu, and R. J. Thompson, Nature582, 193–197 (2020)

    work page 2020

  12. [12]

    R. A. Carollo, D. C. Aveline, B. Rhyno, S. Vishveshwara, C. Lannert, J. D. Murphree, E. R. Elliott, J. R. Williams, R. J. Thompson, and N. Lundblad, Nature606, 281–286 (2022)

    work page 2022

  13. [13]

    K. Frye, S. Abend, W. Bartosch, A. Bawamia, D. Becker, H. Blume, C. Braxmaier, S.-W. Chiow, M. A. Efremov, W. Ert- mer, P. Fierlinger, T. Franz, N. Gaaloul, J. Grosse, C. Grzeschik, O. Hellmig, V . A. Henderson, W. Herr, U. Israelsson, J. Kohel, M. Krutzik, C. Kürbis, C. Lämmerzahl, M. List, D. Lüdtke, N. Lundblad, J. P. Marburger, M. Meister, M. Mihm, H....

    work page 2021

  14. [14]

    Becker, M

    D. Becker, M. D. Lachmann, S. T. Seidel, H. Ahlers, A. N. Dinkelaker, J. Grosse, O. Hellmig, H. Müntinga, V . Schkolnik, T. Wendrich, A. Wenzlawski, B. Weps, R. Corgier, T. Franz, N. Gaaloul, W. Herr, D. Lüdtke, M. Popp, S. Amri, H. Duncker, M. Erbe, A. Kohfeldt, A. Kubelka-Lange, C. Braxmaier, E. Charron, W. Ertmer, M. Krutzik, C. Lämmerzahl, A. Peters, ...

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    van Zoest, N

    T. van Zoest, N. Gaaloul, Y . Singh, H. Ahlers, W. Herr, S. T. Seidel, W. Ertmer, E. Rasel, M. Eckart, E. Kajari, S. Arnold, G. Nandi, W. P. Schleich, R. Walser, A. V ogel, K. Seng- stock, K. Bongs, W. Lewoczko-Adamczyk, M. Schiemangk, T. Schuldt, A. Peters, T. Könemann, H. Müntinga, C. Läm- merzahl, H. Dittus, T. Steinmetz, T. W. Hänsch, and J. Reichel, ...

    work page 2010

  16. [16]

    F. Jia, Z. Huang, L. Qiu, R. Zhou, Y . Yan, and D. Wang, Phys. 10 Rev. Lett.129, 243402 (2022)

    work page 2022

  17. [17]

    V ogt, M

    C. V ogt, M. Woltmann, S. Herrmann, C. Lämmerzahl, H. Al- bers, D. Schlippert, and E. M. Rasel (PRIMUS), Phys. Rev. A 101, 013634 (2020)

    work page 2020

  18. [18]

    Tononi and L

    A. Tononi and L. Salasnich, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 160403 (2019)

    work page 2019

  19. [19]

    S. J. Bereta, L. Madeira, V . S. Bagnato, and M. A. Caracanhas, Am. J. Phys.87, 924 (2019)

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    Tononi, F

    A. Tononi, F. Cinti, and L. Salasnich, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 010402 (2020)

    work page 2020

  21. [21]

    Rhyno, N

    B. Rhyno, N. Lundblad, D. C. Aveline, C. Lannert, and S. Vishveshwara, Phys. Rev. A104, 063310 (2021)

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    Tononi, Phys

    A. Tononi, Phys. Rev. A105, 023324 (2022)

    work page 2022

  23. [23]

    Tononi, G

    A. Tononi, G. E. Astrakharchik, and D. S. Petrov, A VS Quan- tum Sci.6, 023201 (2024)

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    Tononi and L

    A. Tononi and L. Salasnich, Phys. Rep.1072, 1 (2024)

    work page 2024

  25. [25]

    N. S. Móller, F. E. A. dos Santos, V . S. Bagnato, and A. Pelster, New J. Phys.22, 063059 (2020)

    work page 2020

  26. [26]

    Padavi ´c, K

    K. Padavi ´c, K. Sun, C. Lannert, and S. Vishveshwara, Phys. Rev. A102, 043305 (2020)

    work page 2020

  27. [28]

    Kanai and W

    T. Kanai and W. Guo, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 095301 (2021)

    work page 2021

  28. [29]

    Tononi, A

    A. Tononi, A. Pelster, and L. Salasnich, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 013122 (2022)

    work page 2022

  29. [30]

    Li and D

    G. Li and D. K. Efimkin, Phys. Rev. A107, 023319 (2023)

    work page 2023

  30. [31]

    Saito and M

    H. Saito and M. Hayashi, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.92, 044003 (2023)

    work page 2023

  31. [32]

    S. J. Bereta, M. A. Caracanhas, and A. L. Fetter, Phys. Rev. A 103, 053306 (2021)

    work page 2021

  32. [33]

    Guenther, P

    N.-E. Guenther, P. Massignan, and A. L. Fetter, Phys. Rev. A 96, 063608 (2017)

    work page 2017

  33. [34]

    Massignan and A

    P. Massignan and A. L. Fetter, Phys. Rev. A99, 063602 (2019)

    work page 2019

  34. [35]

    M. A. Caracanhas, P. Massignan, and A. L. Fetter, Phys. Rev. A 105, 023307 (2022)

    work page 2022

  35. [36]

    C. A. Jones and P. H. Roberts, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.15, 2599 (1982)

    work page 1982

  36. [37]

    Meyer, H

    N. Meyer, H. Proud, M. Perea-Ortiz, C. O’Neale, M. Baumert, M. Holynski, J. Kronjäger, G. Barontini, and K. Bongs, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 150403 (2017)

    work page 2017

  37. [38]

    Baker-Rasooli, T

    M. Baker-Rasooli, T. Aladjidi, N. A. Krause, A. S. Bradley, and Q. Glorieux, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 233401 (2025)

    work page 2025

  38. [39]

    See Supplemental Material at [URL to be inserted] for further details

    work page

  39. [40]

    Panico, G

    R. Panico, G. Ciliberto, G. I. Martone, T. Congy, D. Ballar- ini, A. S. Lanotte, and N. Pavloff, Phys. Rev. Res.7, L022063 (2025)

    work page 2025

  40. [41]

    Boyd,Chebyshev and F ourier Spectral Methods: Second Re- vised Edition, Dover Books on Mathematics (Dover Publica- tions, 2013)

    J. Boyd,Chebyshev and F ourier Spectral Methods: Second Re- vised Edition, Dover Books on Mathematics (Dover Publica- tions, 2013)

    work page 2013

  41. [42]

    P. K. Newton,The N-V ortex Problem: Analytical Techniques (Springer New York, New York, NY , 2001)

    work page 2001

  42. [43]

    N. G. Berloff, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.37, 1617 (2004)

    work page 2004

  43. [44]

    See video material at this URL

    work page

  44. [45]

    C. A. Jones, S. J. Putterman, and P. H. Roberts, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.19, 2991 (1986)

    work page 1986

  45. [46]

    D’Ambroise, R

    J. D’Ambroise, R. Carretero-González, P. Schmelcher, and P. G. Kevrekidis, Phys. Rev. A105, 063325 (2022)

    work page 2022

  46. [47]

    N. A. Krause and A. S. Bradley, Phys. Rev. A110, 053302 (2024)

    work page 2024

  47. [48]

    Y . K. Chembo and C. R. Menyuk, Phys. Rev. A87, 053852 (2013)

    work page 2013

  48. [49]

    T. Herr, V . Brasch, J. D. Jost, C. Y . Wang, N. M. Kondratiev, M. L. Gorodetsky, and T. J. Kippenberg, Nature Photonics8, 145 (2014)

    work page 2014

  49. [50]

    Tempere, I

    J. Tempere, I. F. Silvera, and J. T. Devreese, Phys. Rev. B65, 195418 (2002)

    work page 2002

  50. [51]

    Tempere, V

    J. Tempere, V . N. Gladilin, I. F. Silvera, and J. T. Devreese, Phys. Rev. B72, 094506 (2005)

    work page 2005

  51. [52]

    V . N. Gladilin, J. Tempere, I. F. Silvera, and J. T. Devreese, Phys. Rev. B74, 104512 (2006)

    work page 2006

  52. [53]

    Tempere, V

    J. Tempere, V . N. Gladilin, I. F. Silvera, and J. T. Devreese, J Low. Temp. Phys.148, 181 (2007)

    work page 2007

  53. [54]

    Tempere, V

    J. Tempere, V . N. Gladilin, I. F. Silvera, J. T. Devreese, and V . V . Moshchalkov, Phys. Rev. B79, 134516 (2009)

    work page 2009

  54. [55]

    Wang and L

    C.-t. Wang and L. Yu, Phys. Rev. B33, 599 (1986)

    work page 1986

  55. [56]

    C. D. Brown, Y . Wang, M. Namazi, G. I. Harris, M. T. Uysal, and J. G. E. Harris, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 216001 (2023)

    work page 2023

  56. [57]

    Lannert, T.-C

    C. Lannert, T.-C. Wei, and S. Vishveshwara, Phys. Rev. A75, 013611 (2007)

    work page 2007

  57. [58]

    K. Sun, K. Padavi ´c, F. Yang, S. Vishveshwara, and C. Lannert, Phys. Rev. A98, 013609 (2018)

    work page 2018

  58. [59]

    Padavi ´c, K

    K. Padavi ´c, K. Sun, C. Lannert, and S. Vishveshwara, EPL120, 20004 (2017)

    work page 2017

  59. [60]

    V . P. Ruban, JETP Letters116, 329–334 (2022)

    work page 2022

  60. [61]

    Cavicchioli, C

    L. Cavicchioli, C. Fort, F. Ancilotto, M. Modugno, F. Minardi, and A. Burchianti, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 093401 (2025)

    work page 2025

  61. [62]

    Huang, K

    Z. Huang, K. Y . Lee, C. K. Wong, L. Qiu, B. Yang, Y . Yan, and D. Wang, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 033056 (2025)

    work page 2025

  62. [63]

    A. C. White, Phys. Rev. A109, 013301 (2024)

    work page 2024

  63. [64]

    M. A. Wieczorek and M. Meschede, Geochemistry, Geo- physics, Geosystems19, 2574 (2018)

    work page 2018

  64. [65]

    Schaeffer, Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems14, 751 (2013)

    N. Schaeffer, Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems14, 751 (2013)

    work page 2013

  65. [66]

    Driscoll and D

    J. Driscoll and D. Healy, Adv. Appl. Math.15, 202 (1994)

    work page 1994

  66. [67]

    A. H. Baker, E. R. Jessup, and T. Manteuffel, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl.26, 962 (2005)

    work page 2005

  67. [68]

    See Wolfram Mathematica notebooks at this URL

    work page