Balance Laws and Transport Theorems for Flows with Singular Interfaces

Ferdinand Thein; Gerald Warnecke

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 46 references

Balance Laws and Transport Theorems for Flows with Singular Interfaces

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read From one generic integral balance law, this paper derives the pointwise differential balance that holds on a moving singular surface inside a material volume.

desk verdict A careful, readable unification of known surface balance laws; the main value is reference-grade clarity, with a genuine but acknowledged proof gap in the global version of the central transport theorem. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.18518 v1 pith:ROQOSWGP submitted 2025-01-30 math.AP math-phmath.MPphysics.flu-dyn

Ferdinand Thein , Gerald Warnecke This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.APmath-phmath.MPphysics.flu-dyn MSC 35L6553A4535Q35

keywords balancelawssingularinterfacestransporttheoremsmovingsurfacesjumpconditionsmeancurvatureReynoldstheoremsurfaceequations

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 that a single integral balance for a material volume split by a moving singular surface, where bulk fields may jump, implies a pointwise differential balance law on the surface, coupling surface dynamics to the jump in bulk quantities across it. The derivation proves the transport theorems it needs: the volume Reynolds transport theorem, a surface transport theorem for moving hypersurfaces, and a generalized Reynolds transport theorem that accounts for the singular surface. Along the way it shows that a flux-correction term appearing in classical surface transport formulas is not an extra postulate but follows from differentiating the parametrized moving surface and its area element. If the derivation is right, modelers of shocks, phase boundaries, reaction fronts, and surfactant-laden interfaces can treat bulk and surface balance equations as two consequences of one integral law, with curvature terms entering with definite geometric meaning.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the parametrized moving surface: a reference surface $\Sigma_0$ is transported by a flow map $\chi_\Sigma^t$ to $\Sigma(t)$, giving surface velocity $w$ and a time-dependent metric $g_{\alpha\beta}$ whose area element evolves by $\frac{d}{dt}\sqrt{g}=(\nabla_\Sigma\cdot w)\sqrt{g}$. From this the paper proves the surface transport theorem (61)–(65), relating the Lagrangian surface time derivative, the Thomas derivative, and the partial time derivative, and the generalized Reynolds transport theorem (69)–(70), which adds a surface integral involving the jump $\llbracket\psi(w-v)\rrbracket\cdot\nu_\Sigma$. The surface divergence theorem (58)–(59) converts tangential flux integrals into surface divergences, and the pillbox limit, a thin cylindrical neighborhood shrunk onto the surface, isolates the surface contribution and produces (71).

What would settle it

Take a closed spherical interface with a known bulk flow and surface density, compute both sides of (71) numerically at a point where the surface normal is horizontal, and check whether the equality holds; because a sphere cannot be represented as one global graph over a fixed plane, failure at such a point would show that the graph assumption in the proof is not actually without loss of generality.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central result is that the generic integral balance (54), applied to a control volume divided by a moving surface $\Sigma(t)$, yields the pointwise surface balance law $$\partial_t \psi_\Sigma + \nabla_\Sigma\cdot(\psi_\Sigma w_q) + (\psi_\nu - 2\kappa_M\psi_\Sigma)w_\nu + \nabla_\Sigma\cdot j^q_\Sigma - \xi_\Sigma = \llbracket\psi\rrbracket w_\nu - \llbracket\psi v + j\rrbracket\cdot\nu_\Sigma.$$ Here $\psi_\Sigma$ is the surface density, $w_q$ and $w_\nu$ are the tangential and normal components of the surface velocity, $\psi_\nu$ is the normal derivative of the surface density, $\kappa_M$ is the mean curvature, $j_\Sigma$ is the surface flux, $\xi_\Sigma$ the surface source, and the right-hand side collects the jumps of bulk density, momentum flux, and diffusive flux across the surface. The paper shows that this equation follows by applying the generalized Reynolds transport theorem and the surface transport theorem to the integral balance and then shrinking a curved pillbox onto the surface; no term is added by hand, and the result is independent of the parametrization used in the proof.

Load-bearing premise

The proof of the generalized transport theorem assumes the singular surface can locally be drawn as a single-valued graph over a fixed flat shadow region with a positive normal component and with the surface moving faster than the fluid in the normal direction, and it leaves the extension to surfaces that cannot be drawn this way to a piecewise argument that is not written out.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Surface balance laws used in sharp-interface and phase-transition models follow from the same integral balance as the bulk equations, so the two need not be postulated separately.
In the absence of surface density, surface flux, and surface source, (71) reduces to the classical jump condition $\llbracket\psi(w-v)-j\rrbracket\cdot\nu_\Sigma=0$, recovering standard Rankine-Hugoniot conditions as a special case.
The final surface balance is independent of the parametrization used in the proof, so different coordinate-based formulations in the literature are reconciled.
Symmetry reduction yields the moving-curve equation (74) in two dimensions and the generalized Rankine-Hugoniot condition (75) for a moving point in one dimension.
The derivation clarifies which terms are geometric, such as the mean-curvature term $-2\kappa_M\psi_\Sigma w_\nu$, and which are physical, namely sources and fluxes, aiding consistent constitutive modeling on interfaces.

Reading between the lines

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

A natural test is to apply (71) to surfactant transport on a deforming droplet, where $j_\Sigma$ is a surface diffusion flux; the sign of the curvature term could be checked against fully resolved numerical simulations.
Because the proof of Theorem 4.4 is local, a global version for closed or self-intersecting interfaces would need either a piecewise graph construction or an implicit level-set formulation, suggesting a concrete technical gap to fill.
The framework suggests that kinetic relations at phase boundaries, often added as separate constitutive assumptions, could be incorporated through the surface source $\xi_\Sigma$ or through jump-dependent surface fluxes without changing the balance structure.
Although boundary interactions are excluded, the same pillbox machinery may extend to interfaces meeting the outer boundary of a domain, connecting this derivation to domain-boundary interface conditions.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

This paper is worth having on the shelf: it takes the standard integral balance for a volume split by a singular surface and derives the pointwise surface balance equation (71) in a clean, self-contained way, with explicit definitions of the Thomas, Lagrangian, and other surface time derivatives. The continuity with Müller, Dreyer, Dziuk–Elliott, and Cermelli–Fried–Gurtin is honestly traced, and the authors show how the so-called flux correction in Müller's transport formula comes out of the parametrized moving surface rather than being postulated. That is the genuinely useful contribution: one proof-based reference where the pieces are assembled with consistent notation.

The soft spot is exactly where the stress-test note points. Theorem 4.4 is stated globally but proved only under the local assumptions of a graph representation and the ordering wν > v·ν; the piecewise extension is deferred with a remark that it is 'omitted.' Since the pillbox derivation of (71) relies on this theorem, the rigorous status of the central claim inherits that gap. This is a real limitation, but it is honestly stated, and the gap looks patchable: reverse the normal for the opposite ordering, use a limiting argument for equality, and patch non-graph surfaces locally. The lower-dimensional reductions in Section 5 are sketched rather than derived, which is fine for a reference but worth flagging.

I do not see circularity: the derivation starts from the integral balance (54) and surface geometry, and only after the fact compares with Müller and Dreyer. No fitted parameters, no invented entities. The citation pattern is broad and fair, including the authors' own past work only where pertinent.

Who gets value: anyone working on phase boundaries, surfactant transport, or sharp-interface models who wants a single source for the surface balance law and its proof machinery. The paper does not change the equations physicists already use, but it makes their derivation accessible and checkable. The proof gap is not fatal; it is a technical incompleteness in a theorem whose final form appears correct.

I would send this to a serious referee. It deserves careful review, and the main request to the authors should be to supply the omitted global extension or, failing that, restate Theorem 4.4 as a local result. I would also bring it to a reading group for people interested in moving interface problems.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper develops transport theorems and balance laws for material control volumes in R^3 that are divided by a moving singular surface across which fields may be discontinuous. The central result is the pointwise surface differential balance (71), derived from the integral balance (54) via a generalized Reynolds transport theorem (Theorem 4.4) and a pillbox argument. The paper also gives a self-contained review of surface calculus, moving-surface time derivatives, and surface transport theorems, and it sketches the reduction to moving curves and points in Section 5.

Significance. If the proof gaps are closed, this would be a useful rigorous reference that unifies volume and surface balance derivations and clarifies the origin of the flux-correction term in Müller's transport formula. The paper's strengths are that the classical theorems are proved rather than cited, the derivations contain no fitted parameters, and the comparison with the existing literature (Müller, Dreyer, Dziuk-Elliott, Cermelli et al.) is explicit. However, the proof of the load-bearing Theorem 4.4 is incomplete as written, and Section 4.3 contains an unjustified omission of jump terms, so the rigorous status of the main claim needs substantial revision.

major comments (3)

[Theorem 4.4; assumptions in Section 2.4, Eq. (46)] The proof of Theorem 4.4 is carried out only under the global graph assumption (46) and the strict ordering wν > v·ν, which is introduced as 'without loss of generality' in Section 2.4. The text in Section 4.4 explicitly says that the piecewise extension is 'omitted'. This is load-bearing because formula (70) is used directly in the pillbox derivation of (71) in Section 4.5. In particular, the proof as written does not cover the material-interface case wν = v·ν, nor a surface that cannot be represented as a single graph over one fixed shadow domain. The authors should either supply the omitted extension (e.g., by a partition of the surface into graph patches and a limiting argument for the degenerate ordering) or restate Theorem 4.4 with an explicitly local graph hypothesis and verify that the pillbox argument needs only the local version.
[Section 4.3, Eqs. (66) and (67)] Equation (66) is obtained from (54) by applying the Gauss-Green theorem and the surface divergence theorem to a control volume that may contain the singular surface Σ(t). For such a control volume the Gauss-Green theorem produces an additional surface jump contribution ∫_Σ JjK·νΣ dS, and the time derivative of the volume term would, in the non-smooth case, require the generalized transport theorem which adds ∫_Σ JψK w·νΣ dS. These jump terms are absent from (66). Consequently, the pillbox limit in Section 4.3 yields Eq. (67), which is not a valid surface balance in the presence of bulk discontinuities; it is incompatible with the final equation (71) unless the combination Jψv + jK·νΣ − JψK wν vanishes. The authors should either explicitly restrict Section 4.3 to fields that are continuous across Σ (and say so), or include the jump terms so that the limiting process gives the full surface balance with jumps.
[Section 4.5, pillbox derivation after Eq. (71)] The volume VΣ,ε is defined as a geometric tube around a patch of Σ(t), but the generalized transport theorem (70) and the balance law (54) were derived for material volumes whose boundary moves with the particle velocity v. If VΣ,ε is intended to be a material volume, the authors should state that at each evaluation time one chooses a material volume that instantaneously coincides with the geometric pillbox; otherwise the boundary term in (70) would have to use the boundary velocity w rather than v, which would change the resulting jump condition. As written, the application of (70) to the geometric pillbox is not justified and needs a clarifying sentence or a short argument.

minor comments (6)

[Section 5, after Eq. (73)] Equations (74) and (75) are presented as direct reductions to two and one dimensions, but only a heuristic sketch is given. Since the paper advertises a rigorous derivation, either provide the reduction in more detail or explicitly label these formulas as formal analogies.
[Theorem 4.3, proof, line before Eq. (64)] The phrase 'We we set ψν' contains a duplicated word and should read 'We set ψν'.
[Introduction, paragraph 2] The name 'Müeller' appears to be a typo for 'Müller'.
[Section 4.4, proof of Theorem 4.4] In the surface integral transformation, the symbol uν should read wν (the normal component of the surface velocity), based on Eq. (36).
[Section 4.3, Lebesgue differentiation paragraph] The phrase 'of of the inequalities' should be corrected to 'of the inequalities'.
[General notation, Section 3] The color coding (green and blue) used to distinguish volume and surface terms is not reproduced in the arXiv text; statements such as 'terms marked with mixed colors' are unintelligible without the actual colors. Please add labels or use another marking scheme.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the surface balance (71) is derived from the generic integral balance (54) via independent transport theorems and localization; the only significant caveat is an acknowledged proof gap in Theorem 4.4, which is a rigor issue, not circularity.

full rationale

The paper's central result, the pointwise surface balance (71), is obtained by inserting the volume transport theorem (Theorem 4.4, formulas (69)-(70)) and the surface transport theorem (Theorem 4.3, formulas (61)-(65)) into the a priori generic balance law (54), then localizing with a pillbox argument and the Lebesgue differentiation theorem. The target equation (71) appears only at the end of this chain; it is not assumed as an input and no parameter is fitted to it. The jump term JψK wν - Jψv + jK·νΣ on the right of (71) is assembled from the boundary flux terms and the jump contribution in (70), not inserted by hand or borrowed from the conclusion. The comparison with Müller [30, (3.16)] and Dreyer [15] in Section 4.5 is explicitly post hoc, and the surface derivative identities used there are derived from the parametrized geometry in Section 2, not from the balance being proven. There are no fitted inputs, no load-bearing uniqueness theorems, and no self-citation used to justify the central claim; the only self-reference, Warnecke [44], is a background textbook citation. The paper's acknowledged limitation is a proof gap rather than circularity: Theorem 4.4 is stated globally, but its proof relies on the 'without loss of generality' assumptions in Section 2.4 that all components of νΣ are positive and wν > v·ν, with V2(0) represented as a column (46). The proof then says, 'Since we are interested in using this theorem locally, this is not a serious restriction... We omit this technical step.' This leaves the global statement of Theorem 4.4, and hence the fully global form of (70) used in the pillbox derivation, not fully established for material interfaces with wν = v·ν or for surfaces that cannot be locally graphed over a fixed shadow domain. This is a correctness/rigor risk that the authors honestly flag, and it can likely be repaired by piecewise graph patches, normal reversal, and a limiting argument; it does not make the derivation circular. Therefore, under the circularity criteria, the appropriate finding is no significant circularity with score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The derivation relies on standard smoothness and parametrization assumptions, not on fitted constants. There are no free parameters and no invented entities. The main non-standard proof requirement is the shadow-domain graph representation used in Theorem 4.4, which the paper itself flags as omitted in the general case.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption The singular surface is smooth and admits a local or global smooth bijective parametrization Φ with rank-two Jacobian, plus a smooth flow map χΣ.
Assumed in Sections 2.1 and 2.3; all surface integrals and transport proofs rely on it.
domain assumption Particle motion is a smooth diffeomorphism χt with no particles appearing or disappearing, so the deformation gradient is invertible.
Introduced in Section 2.4; used in the Reynolds transport theorem proofs and in equation (45).
domain assumption Bulk densities and fluxes are continuously differentiable on each side of the surface and have bounded one-sided limits at the surface.
Stated in Section 4.4 before Theorem 4.4; needed to justify Leibniz differentiation and jump brackets.
ad hoc to paper For the proof of Theorem 4.4, the initial volume can be represented as a graph over a shadow domain (46) and the surface as a graph with positive normal component.
Introduced in Section 2.4 and used in the proof of Theorem 4.4; the general case is delegated to an omitted piecewise extension.
standard math Standard results from analysis and differential geometry: Gauss-Green, Kelvin-Stokes, Lebesgue differentiation theorem, and determinant differentiation formula (78).
Invoked throughout Section 4 and Appendix A.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Balance Laws and Transport Theorems for Flows with Singular Interfaces." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ROQOSWGP

@misc{pith2026250118518,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Balance Laws and Transport Theorems for Flows with Singular Interfaces},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ROQOSWGP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.18518}
}

read the original abstract

This paper gives a concise but rigorous mathematical description of a material control volume that is separated into two parts by a singular surface at which physical states are discontinuous. The geometrical background material is summarized in a unified manner. Transport theorems for use in generic balance laws are given with proofs since they provide some insight into the results. Also the step from integral balances to differential equations is given in some detail.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.18518 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Sketch of the pillbox argument. To obtain the balance equation for the singular points on a surface there is a so called pillbox argument. It was used by Truesdell and Toupin [43, Section 193], Müller [30, Section 3.1] and for the two dimensional case by Gurtin [21, Section 3.2]. The result generalizes the derivation of jump conditions on surfaces of discontinuity that goes back to the seminal paper of Riemann [33].… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

[1]

D. M. Anderson, P. Cermelli, E. Fried, M. E. Gurtin, and G. B. McFadden. Gen- eral dynamical sharp-interface conditions for phase transformations in viscous heat- conducting fluids. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 581:323–370, 2007

work page 2007
[2]

Anderson.Modern Compressible Flow: With Historical Perspective

J. Anderson.Modern Compressible Flow: With Historical Perspective. Aeronautical and Aerospace Engineering Series. McGraw-Hill Education, 2003

work page 2003
[3]

R. Aris. Vectors, tensors, and the basic equations of fluid mechanics. Dover Publi- cations, New York, 1989

work page 1989
[4]

D. Bedeaux. Nonequilibrium thermodynamics and statistical physics of surfaces. Advances in Chemical Physics, 64:47–109, 1986

work page 1986
[5]

Bedeaux, A

D. Bedeaux, A. Albano, and P. Mazur. Boundary conditions and non-equilibrium thermodynamics. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 82(3):438 – 462, 1976

work page 1976
[6]

D. Bothe. On moving hypersurfaces and the discontinuous ODE-system associated with two-phase flows.Nonlinearity, 33(10):5425–5456, 2020

work page 2020
[7]

D. Bothe. Sharp-interface continuum thermodynamics of multicomponent fluid sys- tems with interfacial mass. Internat. J. Engrg. Sci., 179:Paper No. 103731, 31, 2022. 34

work page 2022
[8]

Bourne and P

D. Bourne and P. Kendall.Vector Analysis and Cartesian Tensors, Third edition. Taylor & Francis, 1992

work page 1992

Show all 46 references

[9]

R. M. Bowen and C. C. Wang. On displacement derivatives.Quart. Appl. Math., 29:29–39, 1971

1971
[10]

Cermelli, E

P. Cermelli, E. Fried, and M. E. Gurtin. Transport relations for surface integrals arising in the formulation of balance laws for evolving fluid interfaces.Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 544:339–351, 12 2005

2005
[11]

C. M. Dafermos.Hyperbolic Conservation Laws in Continuum Physics, volume 325 of Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2016

2016
[12]

De Groot and P

S. De Groot and P. Mazur. Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics. Dover Books on Physics. Dover Publications, 2013

2013
[13]

Onageneralbalancelawforcontinuawithaninterface

F.Dell’IsolaandA.Romano. Onageneralbalancelawforcontinuawithaninterface. Ricerche Mat., 35(2):325–337, 1986

1986
[14]

Dell’Isola and A

F. Dell’Isola and A. Romano. On the derivation of thermomechanical balance equa- tions for continuous systems with a nonmaterial interface.Internat. J. Engrg. Sci., 25(11-12):1459–1468, 1987

1987
[15]

W. Dreyer. On jump conditions at phase boundaries for ordered and disordered phases. Preprint 869, Weierstrass Institute for Applied Analysis and Stochastics (WIAS), Berlin, 2003. Reprinted in this volume

2003
[16]

Dziuk and C

G. Dziuk and C. M. Elliott. Finite elements on evolving surfaces.IMA Journal of Numerical Analysis, 27(2):262, 2007

2007
[17]

Estrada and R

R. Estrada and R. P. Kanwal. Non-classical derivation of the transport theorems for wave fronts.J. Math. Anal. Appl., 159(1):290–297, 1991

1991
[18]

L. C. Evans. Partial differential equations. American Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1998

1998
[19]

Feireisl, M

E. Feireisl, M. Lukáčová-Medvid’ová, H. Mizerová, and B. She.Numerical analysis of compressible fluid flows. Modeling, Simulation and Applications Vol. 20. Springer, Cham, 2021

2021
[20]

Grinfeld

P. Grinfeld. Introduction to Tensor Analysis and the Calculus of Moving Surfaces. Springer New York, 2013

2013
[21]

M. E. Gurtin.Thermomechanics of evolving phase boundaries in the plane. Oxford University Press, 1993

1993
[22]

M. E. Gurtin, A. Struthers, and W. O. Williams. A transport theorem for moving interfaces. Quart. Appl. Math., 47(4):773–777, 1989. 35

1989
[23]

Kotchine

N. Kotchine. Sur la théorie des ondes de choc dans un fluide.Rendiconti del Circolo Matematico di Palermo Series 2, 50(2):305–344, 1926

1926
[24]

Landau and E

L. Landau and E. Lifshitz. Fluid Mechanics - Volume 6 of Course of Theoretical Physics. Elsevier Science, 1987

1987
[25]

J. M. Lee. Introduction to Smooth Manifolds, volume 218 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer New York, 2013

2013
[26]

LeFloch.Hyperbolic Systems of Conservation Laws: The Theory of Classical and Nonclassical Shock Waves

P. LeFloch.Hyperbolic Systems of Conservation Laws: The Theory of Classical and Nonclassical Shock Waves. Lectures in Mathematics. Birkhäuser Verlag, 2002

2002
[27]

Mauri.Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics in Multiphase Flows

R. Mauri.Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics in Multiphase Flows. Soft and Biolog- ical Matter. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013

2013
[28]

G. M. Mavrovouniotis and H. Brenner. A micromechanical investigation of interfa- cial transport processes. i. interfacial conservation equations.Philosophical Transac- tions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Physical and Engineering Sciences, 345(1675):165–207, 1993

1993
[29]

C. Meyer. Matrix Analysis and Applied Linear Algebra. SIAM, Philadelphia, 2001

2001
[30]

I. Müller. Thermodynamics. Interaction of Mechanics and Mathematics Series. Pitman, 1985

1985
[31]

Müller and W

I. Müller and W. H. Müller.Fundamentals of Thermodynamics and Applications. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009

2009
[32]

Petryk and Z

H. Petryk and Z. Mróz. Time derivatives of integrals and functionals defined on varying volume and surface domains.Arch. Mech. (Arch. Mech. Stos.), 38(5-6):697– 724, 1986

1986
[33]

B. Riemann. Über die Fortpflanzung ebener Luftwellen von endlicher Schwing- ingsweite. InCollected Papers, pages 188–207. Springer Verlag, 1990

1990
[34]

W. Rudin. Real and complex analysis. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, third edition, 1987

1987
[35]

J. C. Slattery, L. Sagis, and E.-S. Oh.Interfacial transport phenomena. Springer Science & Business Media, 2007

2007
[36]

J. Smoller. Shock waves and reaction—diffusion equations, volume 258. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

2012
[37]

G. Strang. Linear Algebra and its Applications. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Coll. Publ., Fort Worth - Philadelphia - London, 1988

1988
[38]

Thomas, M

G. Thomas, M. Weir, J. Hass, and F. Giordano.Thomas’ Calculus. Pearson Addison Wesley, 2004. 36

2004
[39]

T. Y. Thomas. The fundamental hydrodynamical equations and shock conditions for gases. Mathematics Magazine, 22:169–189, 1949

1949
[40]

T. Y. Thomas. Extended compatibility conditions for the study of surfaces of dis- continuity in continuum mechanics.J. Math. Mech., 6:311–322, 1957

1957
[41]

T. Y. Thomas. Plastic flow and fracture in solids by tracy Y Thomas. Elsevier, 1961

1961
[42]

E. F. Toro.Riemann Solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009

2009
[43]

Truesdell and R

C. Truesdell and R. Toupin. The classical field theories. In S. Flügge, editor,Princi- ples of Classical Mechanics and Field Theory / Prinzipien der Klassischen Mechanik und Feldtheorie, pages226–858.SpringerBerlinHeidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1960

1960
[44]

Warnecke.Analytische Methoden in der Theorie der Erhaltungsgleichung

G. Warnecke.Analytische Methoden in der Theorie der Erhaltungsgleichung. B.G. Teubner, Stuttgart-Leipzig, 1999

1999
[45]

H. Yang. Riemann problems for a class of coupled hyperbolic systems of conservation laws. Journal of Differential Equations, 159(2):447 – 484, 1999

1999
[46]

G. Zemplén. Kriterien für die physikalische Bedeutung der unstetigen Lösungen der hydrodynamischen Bewegungsgleichungen.Math. Ann., 61(3):437–449, 1905. 37

1905

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

D. M. Anderson, P. Cermelli, E. Fried, M. E. Gurtin, and G. B. McFadden. Gen- eral dynamical sharp-interface conditions for phase transformations in viscous heat- conducting fluids. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 581:323–370, 2007

work page 2007

[2] [2]

Anderson.Modern Compressible Flow: With Historical Perspective

J. Anderson.Modern Compressible Flow: With Historical Perspective. Aeronautical and Aerospace Engineering Series. McGraw-Hill Education, 2003

work page 2003

[3] [3]

R. Aris. Vectors, tensors, and the basic equations of fluid mechanics. Dover Publi- cations, New York, 1989

work page 1989

[4] [4]

D. Bedeaux. Nonequilibrium thermodynamics and statistical physics of surfaces. Advances in Chemical Physics, 64:47–109, 1986

work page 1986

[5] [5]

Bedeaux, A

D. Bedeaux, A. Albano, and P. Mazur. Boundary conditions and non-equilibrium thermodynamics. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 82(3):438 – 462, 1976

work page 1976

[6] [6]

D. Bothe. On moving hypersurfaces and the discontinuous ODE-system associated with two-phase flows.Nonlinearity, 33(10):5425–5456, 2020

work page 2020

[7] [7]

D. Bothe. Sharp-interface continuum thermodynamics of multicomponent fluid sys- tems with interfacial mass. Internat. J. Engrg. Sci., 179:Paper No. 103731, 31, 2022. 34

work page 2022

[8] [8]

Bourne and P

D. Bourne and P. Kendall.Vector Analysis and Cartesian Tensors, Third edition. Taylor & Francis, 1992

work page 1992