Exact solutions for the moments of the binary collision integral and its relation to the relaxation-time approximation in leading-order anisotropic fluid dynamics

Etele Moln\'ar

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 72 references

Exact solutions for the moments of the binary collision integral and its relation to the relaxation-time approximation in leading-order anisotropic fluid dynamics

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The scalar moments of the hard-sphere binary collision integral for anisotropic distribution functions are exactly quadratic products of anisotropic thermodynamic integrals, and the relaxation-time approximation drives boost-invariant…

desk verdict A solid set of exact collision moments undermined by an internal inconsistency in the asymptotic RTA comparison, so the advertised factor-of-two slowdown is not established. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.17422 v2 pith:NSE5NQW6 submitted 2025-04-24 nucl-th hep-phphysics.flu-dyn

Etele Molnár This is my paper · ORCID

classification nucl-thhep-phphysics.flu-dyn PACS 12.38.Mh24.10.Nz47.75.+f51.10.+y

keywords anisotropicfluiddynamicsbinarycollisionintegralrelaxation-timeapproximationhard-spherecrosssectionthermodynamicintegralsboost-invariantexpansionmomentclosurerelativisticBoltzmannequation

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 formulas for the moments of the nonlinear binary collision integral in leading-order anisotropic fluid dynamics. For any anisotropic distribution function of the form $\hat{f}_{0k}(\hat{\alpha}, \hat{\beta}_u E_{ku}, \hat{\beta}_l E_{kl})$, the loss and gain terms decompose into quadratic products of anisotropic thermodynamic integrals, turning a twelve-dimensional integral into computable algebra. Applied to the spheroidal anisotropic distribution in a longitudinally expanding system, the formulas show that the widely used relaxation-time approximation relaxes roughly twice as fast as the full binary collision term, with effective relaxation-time ratios $\tau_{ij}/\tau_R$ between 1.69 and 2.35. The paper also shows that promoting two dynamical moments instead of one removes most of the ambiguity in closing the conservation equations. If these results are correct, anisotropic hydrodynamics gains a first-principles collision closure and a quantitative measure of the RTA's systematic bias.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a projection method for the twelve-dimensional gain and loss integrals. The loss integral is reduced by the identity $P_{00} = \sigma_T k \cdot k'$, leaving products of single-particle moments. The gain terms are built from the auxiliary tensors $\Theta^{\mu_1\cdots\mu_n}$, with coefficients $B_{nq} = \sigma_T \sqrt{s}(s-4m_0^2)^{(2q+1)/2}/(2^{n+1}(2q+1)!!)$, which become powers of $k \cdot k'$ in the massless limit. Contracting these tensors with $u$ and $l$ produces the quadratic products of the anisotropic thermodynamic integrals defined by Eq. (10). The spheroidal distribution turns those integrals into equilibrium integrals times anisotropy ratios $R_{nrq}(\xi)$, making the collision moments explicit functions of $\xi$ and the matched temperature. For the fluid-dynamical application, the paper uses the moment hierarchy of Eq. (102) and combines pairs of equations to evolve two dynamical moments together, Eq. (112), which is what resolves the closure ambiguity.

What would settle it

Compute the same scalar moments numerically for the spheroidal distribution with an energy-dependent cross section, such as one growing with $\sqrt{s}$; if the values depart from the paper's quadratic-product expressions at finite $\xi$, the exact closure is restricted to constant cross sections. Alternatively, extract the relaxation-time ratios from a full kinetic-theory simulation of the same setup; ratios near 1 rather than 1.69-2.35 would contradict the central numerical claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that every scalar moment $\hat{C}_{ij} = \hat{G}_{ij} - \hat{L}_{ij}$ of the ultrarelativistic hard-sphere collision term is a finite sum of quadratic products of anisotropic thermodynamic integrals $\hat{I}^{nrq}$. The loss term factorizes because the integrated transition rate reduces to $\sigma_T k \cdot k'$, leaving $\hat{I}\hat{I}$ products; the gain terms arise by contracting the center-of-momentum tensors $\Theta^{\mu_1\cdots\mu_n}$, whose coefficients $B_{nq}$ are powers of $\sqrt{s}$ in the massless limit, with the fluid four-velocity $u$ and the anisotropy direction $l$. For the spheroidal distribution all integrals with odd powers of $E_{kl}$ vanish, so the collision moments become explicit functions of the equilibrium thermodynamic integrals and anisotropy ratios $R_{nrq}(\xi)$. The paper's numerical conclusion is that in a boost-invariant expansion, for every closure choice and both initial anisotropies considered, the RTA moments are larger in magnitude than the binary-collision moments, so the RTA drives the system to equilibrium faster; matching the asymptotic large-$\xi$ ratios yields $\tau_{ij}/\tau_R$ from 1.69 to 2.35, increasing with moment order. Evolving two dynamical moments together through Eq. (112) makes the closing solutions nearly independent of which higher moment is chosen.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation assumes an energy-independent, isotropic hard-sphere cross section and then takes the strict massless limit; with an energy-dependent cross section the loss-term factorization and the quadratic-product gain formulas no longer hold.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Anisotropic fluid dynamics can replace the ad hoc RTA collision term with exact hard-sphere collision moments, whose coupling to lower-order moments is fully specified.
For the spheroidal distribution, the RTA systematically overestimates the equilibration rate: the correct relaxation times for the moments studied are 1.69 to 2.35 times larger than $\tau_R$.
Higher-order moments relax on increasingly long timescales, so a single relaxation time cannot represent the full nonlinear collision term even for an isotropic state.
Scaling the RTA relaxation time by the asymptotic ratios $f_{ij}^{-1}$ reproduces the binary-collision moments well, giving effective $\tau_{ij}$ parameters for practical use.
Closing the conservation laws with two dynamical moments instead of one makes the solutions robust against the choice of which higher moment is used.

Reading between the lines

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

If the same projection method were applied to an energy-dependent cross section, the $B_{nq}$ coefficients would remain inside the $k, k'$ integrals, so the quadratic-product factorization would fail; the exact formulas therefore delimit the regime in which constant-cross-section closures are trustworthy.
The method should transfer to other anisotropic distributions of the same functional form, such as the anisotropic Jüttner or bi-Maxwellian forms used in plasma physics, where the odd-$E_{kl}$ symmetry need not hold and more $l$-projections would be required.
The factor-of-two difference in relaxation rates implies that hydrodynamic simulations built on the RTA should exhibit pressure anisotropies that decay faster than those from the full collision term; this is a direct, testable prediction for kinetic-transport comparisons.
Because $\tau_{ij}$ grows with moment order, the results suggest a spectrum of relaxation times even near equilibrium, which second-order transient fluid dynamics should be able to extract by matching the small-$\xi$ expansion of the asymptotic ratios.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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

Short version: the exact moments are a real result; the advertised factor-of-two RTA slowdown is not. Sec III and IV A are careful and, for the hard-sphere/massless setup, I believe the collision moments (46)-(81) and the RS reductions (94)-(99) are correct. The conservation checks work, and the appendices are detailed enough to audit. The problem is Sec IV D. The asymptotic limits there do not follow from the paper's own formulas. From Eq. (94) with hat n = n0 and the Appendix F matching, F20(infinity) should be 3/8 - 32/(9 pi^2) ~ +0.0147, while Eq. (118) prints -0.0478. Eq. (95) similarly gives F30(infinity) ~ +0.041, while Eq. (119) gives -0.122. Since Eqs. (127)-(129) build the effective relaxation times from these limits, the headline "twice slower" is not supported. There is also a typo-level issue in Eq. (93): the R100 exponent is written 2-n, while the matching conditions require R100^(n-2); that typo may be related to the later arithmetic. I checked the algebraic moments independently by spot checks; they are internally consistent. But the interpretive part needs to be redone. A corrected calculation might still show that RTA relaxes faster, since the finite-xi curves in Fig. 4 do show smaller magnitudes for the binary moments, but the quantitative scaling and the specific 1.69-2.35 ratios are not established. The boundary with the author's earlier Ref. [52] is also not drawn explicitly, and the figure captions contain small errors (Fig. 4 lists F20 twice). Who is this for: people working on anisotropic hydrodynamics and RTA corrections will want the exact moments. It deserves a serious referee, but it should not be accepted without fixing Sec IV D and Eq. (93).

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper computes scalar moments of the nonlinear binary collision integral in the ultrarelativistic hard-sphere approximation for anisotropic single-particle distribution functions of the form f-hat_0k(alpha-hat, beta-hat_u E_ku, beta-hat_l E_kl). The moments are expressed as quadratic products of anisotropic thermodynamic integrals, with the loss terms factorizing into products of lower moments and the gain terms evaluated through a set of auxiliary tensor integrals. The formalism is then specialized to the Romatschke-Strickland distribution, applied to (0+1)-dimensional Bjorken flow, and compared with the Anderson-Witting relaxation-time approximation. The paper claims that the RTA drives equilibration about twice as fast as the binary collision integral, and introduces asymptotic relaxation-time rescaling factors tau_ij/tau_R in the range 1.69-2.35.

Significance. If the central derivation is correct, this is a valuable result: it provides an exact, parameter-free closure for the collision term in leading-order anisotropic fluid dynamics for the massless hard-sphere model, and it quantifies the systematic bias of the RTA. The appendices contain a detailed, self-contained derivation of the loss and gain terms, and the internal consistency checks for the conservation laws (C00 = C10 = C01 = 0) are convincing. The applicability to arbitrary anisotropic distributions of the stated form is a genuine generalization over existing isotropic results. However, the quantitative conclusions of the paper, specifically the factor-of-two slower equilibration and the effective relaxation-time ratios, rest on the asymptotic limits in Sec. IV D, and these limits are not consistent with the explicit moment formulas derived earlier in the same paper. The central analytic results of Sec. III therefore appear sound, but the application and the headline numerical claim need substantial reworking.

major comments (2)

[Sec. IV D, Eqs. (94), (116), (118) and Appendix F] The asymptotic value of F20(infinity) quoted in Eq. (118) does not follow from the paper's own formula for C20. Using Eq. (94) with n = n0 and the massless RS thermodynamic integrals of Appendix F (with the correct exponent in Eq. (93); see the next comment), one obtains Ihat300/I300 = R300 R200^{-2} R100 -> 32/(3 pi^2), while Pl/I300 and Pperp/I300 vanish as xi -> infinity. Therefore F20(infinity) = -(1/3)(32/(3 pi^2)) + 3/8 = 3/8 - 32/(9 pi^2) ≈ +0.0147. Equation (118) instead lists -(512 - 45 pi^2)/(144 pi^2) ≈ -0.0478, which has the opposite sign. The same pattern affects the higher moments: from Eq. (95) and Appendix F one obtains F30(infinity) ≈ +0.041, whereas Eq. (119) gives -6/(5 pi^2) ≈ -0.122; from Eq. (97) one obtains F02(infinity) = 3/8, whereas Eq. (121) gives 9/16. Since the effective relaxation times tau_ij/tau_R in Eqs. (127)-(129) and the claimed factor-of-two difference between the binary collision integral and the RTA are built directly on these asymptotic values, the headline numerical conclusion is not supported by the displayed formulas. This is an internal inconsistency, independent of any modeling assumptions, and it must be resolved before the application section can be accepted.
[Sec. IV A, Eq. (93)] Equation (93) contains an exponent error in the factor involving R100. Combining Eq. (92) with the scaling Inq(alpha_RS, beta_RS) = (lambda_RS/lambda) (beta/beta_RS)^{n+2} Inq(alpha,beta) gives Ihat_nrq = Inq Rnrq [R200]^{1-n} [R100]^{n-2}, not [R100]^{2-n}. The displayed formula contradicts Eq. (87) already for n=1: it would give Ihat100 = I10 R100^2 instead of the matching value I10. For n>=3 the displayed exponent changes the large-xi asymptotics drastically (e.g., it would make Ihat300/I300 grow like xi rather than approach 32/(3 pi^2)). The subsequent asymptotic evaluations in Sec. IV D appear to use the corrected exponent for the RTA values, but the binary-collision asymptotic expressions in Eqs. (118)-(123) are nonetheless inconsistent with the moment formulas, as detailed in the previous comment. The exponent in Eq. (93) must be corrected and all asymptotic limits re-derived.

minor comments (2)

[Fig. 4 and Fig. 5 captions] In the captions of both figures, the blue solid line is described as FRS_20, but from the context and the ordering red/green/blue it should be FRS_40 (and similarly FRS_40,AW for the dashed line).
[Sec. IV A, text after Eq. (100)] The sentence comparing the first terms of the binary collision integral and the RTA states that the numerical prefactors in the binary case are 'consistently smaller than 1'; the prefactors are -1/3, -1/2, and -3/5, which indeed have magnitude smaller than 1, but the statement could be made more precise by noting that the signs and magnitudes of the remaining terms also matter.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the core moment formulas are derived from stated kinetic-theory assumptions with no fitted inputs.

full rationale

The central derivation in Sec. III starts from the definition of the binary collision integral, the hard-sphere constant cross section (Eq. 37), and the massless limit (Eq. 44), and evaluates the loss and gain moments through auxiliary integrals derived in Appendices B-D, ending in closed quadratic products of anisotropic thermodynamic integrals. No parameter is fitted to the target moments. The self-citations to Bnq (Refs. 51,52) and to the general moment equations (Ref. 40) are either re-derived in this paper or are parameter-free results whose stated assumptions do not include the new collision moments, so they constitute real evidence rather than load-bearing circularity. The Rnrq factorization for the Romatschke-Strickland distribution is a stated mathematical property of that distribution, not an input that presupposes the collision moments. The tau_ij rescaling in Sec. IV D is an explicit calibration of the RTA relaxation time to the asymptotic ratio of the same binary and RTA collision moments; the paper presents it as a matching procedure, not as an independent prediction, and the headline "twice slower equilibration" claim rests on the directly compared moment formulas rather than on the rescaled fit. Any possible numerical inconsistency in the listed asymptotic limits would be a correctness concern, not a circularity of the derivation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The moment formulas are derived from the stated axioms (classical statistics, constant cross section, massless limit, leading-order anisotropic ansatz) without fitting any constants to data. The applications add the spheroidal Romatschke-Strickland ansatz and a finite truncation of the moment hierarchy. The only hand-chosen numbers are the simulation inputs (tau_R = 0.5 fm/c, T0 = 0.5 GeV, mu0 = 0, tau0 = 1 fm/c, xi0 = 0 or 50), which do not enter the central analytic claim. No new physical entities such as particles, fields, or forces are introduced.

free parameters (3)

tau_R = 1/(sigma_T n_0) = 0.5 fm/c for the numerical runs
Mean free time between collisions; a standard definitional input chosen by hand in Sec. IV B for the Bjorken-flow demonstration. It sets the overall 1/tau_R scale of the collision moments but cancels in the f_ij ratios that support the main comparison.
initial anisotropy xi0 = 0 and 50
Initial condition for the ODE solutions in Figs. 1-3, chosen to represent an isotropic and a strongly oblate initial state. It does not enter the analytic moment formulas.
initial temperature T0, chemical potential mu0, proper time tau0 = 0.5 GeV, 0, 1 fm/c
Initial conditions for the Bjorken-flow demonstration in Sec. IV B. They parameterize the illustrative solutions only and do not affect the central analytic claim.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption Boltzmann equation for classical indistinguishable particles with binary elastic collisions obeying detailed balance
The collision integral (34) and the RS distribution (82) use classical Boltzmann statistics; quantum statistics are excluded. Stated at the start of Sec. II and Sec. IV A.
domain assumption Hard-sphere, constant, energy-independent, isotropic cross section sigma_T
Eq. (37). Without it the Bnq coefficients (43) would carry s-dependence inside the k, k' integrals and the quadratic-product structure of the moments would break down.
domain assumption Ultrarelativistic massless limit m0 to 0
Used for the loss terms (45) and the massless limit of Bnq (44); massive-gas moments would require (s - 4m^2) factors and non-factorizing integrands.
domain assumption Leading-order anisotropic ansatz f_k = f-hat_0k(alpha-hat, beta-hat_u E_ku, beta-hat_l E_kl) with the collision term evaluated at f-hat_0k only
Eqs. (7) and (15). The paper explicitly defers delta-f-hat corrections to future work, so the computed moments are for the leading-order distribution only.
ad hoc to paper Finite truncation of the moment hierarchy to close the conservation equations
Closures (105)-(110) and the two-moment combinations (112)-(115) select a finite subset of the infinite hierarchy. The about-twice-slower and two-moment-resolution conclusions are drawn within these truncations.
domain assumption Spheroidal Romatschke-Strickland form for the applications
Eq. (82). The numerical results of Sec. IV are specific to the RS ansatz, although the Sec. III moment formulas hold for the broader class of anisotropic distributions.
standard math Standard tensor decomposition and symmetrization combinatorics
Eqs. (9)-(11) and Appendices C-D use standard linear algebra and counting of distinct permutations; no new mathematical axioms are introduced.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Exact solutions for the moments of the binary collision integral and its relation to the relaxation-time approximation in leading-order anisotropic fluid dynamics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NSE5NQW6

@misc{pith2026250417422,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Exact solutions for the moments of the binary collision integral and its relation to the relaxation-time approximation in leading-order anisotropic fluid dynamics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NSE5NQW6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.17422}
}

abstract

We compute the moments of the nonlinear binary collision integral in the ultrarelativistic hard-sphere approximation for an arbitrary anisotropic distribution function in the local rest frame. This anisotropic distribution function has an angular asymmetry controlled by the parameter of anisotropy $\xi$, such that in the limit of a vanishing anisotropy $\lim_{\xi \rightarrow 0} \hat{f}_{0 \mathbf{k}} = f_{0 \mathbf{k}}$, approaches the spherically symmetric local equilibrium distribution function. The corresponding moments of the binary collision integral are obtained in terms of quadratic products of different moments of the anisotropic distribution function and couple to a well defined set of lower-order moments. To illustrate these results we compare the moments of the binary collision integral to the moments of the widely used relaxation-time approximation of Anderson and Witting in case of a spheroidal distribution function. We found that in an expanding system the nonlinear Boltzmann collision term leads to twice slower equilibration than the relaxation-time approximation. Furthermore we also show that including two dynamical moments helps to resolve the ambiguity which additional moment of the Boltzmann equation to choose to close the conservation laws.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.17422 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. The same as Fig. 1 but for an initial anisotropy of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. Similar to Fig. 1 and Fig. 2. The evolution of the fugacity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (4 more)

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Similar to the previous results in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 this new figure also shows the evolution of the fugacity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_3.png]

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. The normalized and dimensionless collision terms [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. The same as Fig. 4, but with scaled values [see Eq. (124)] of the collision terms in the RTA. (a) Left: the solid lines [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Similar to Fig. 3, showing the evolution of the fugacity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages

[52]

Dissipation flow-frames: particle, energy, thermometer,

P. V´ an and T. S. Bir´ o, “Dissipation flow-frames: particle, energy, thermometer,” [arXiv:1305.3190 [gr-qc]]

arXiv
[1]

(42) into Eq

The ˆGn0 gain terms The simplest gain term ˆGn0 is computed by inserting Eq. (42) into Eq. (60), and hence, for i = n and j = 0 we have ˆGn0 = Z KK′ ˆf0k ˆf0k′ ⌊n/2⌋X q=0 (−1)qbnqBnq∆(µ1µ2 T ··· ∆µ2q−1µ2q T Pµ2q+1 T ··· Pµn) T uµ1··· uµn. (D1) Now note that the contraction of the symmetrized tensor product by uµ1··· uµn leads to ∆(µ1µ2 T ··· ∆µ2q−1µ2q T P...

work page
[2]

The ˆGn1 gain terms The ˆGn1 gain term differs from the ˆGn0 gain term since it contains one projection in the direction of the anisotropy, ˆGn1 =− Z KK′ ˆf0k ˆf0k′ ⌊(n+1)/2⌋X q=0 (−1)qbn+1,qBn+1,q∆(µ1µ2 T ··· ∆µ2q−1µ2q T Pµ2q+1 T ··· Pµn+1) T uµ1··· uµnlµn+1, (D9) where the coefficient of distinct terms in the symmetrized tensor product is bn+1,q≡ (n+1)!...

work page
[3]

The ˆGn2 gain terms The last gain term of interest is a generalization of our previous results, now including two projections in the direction of the anisotropy, ˆGn2 = Z dKdK′ ˆf0k ˆf0k′ ⌊(n+2)/2⌋X q=0 (−1)qbn+2,qBn+2,q∆(µ1µ2 T ··· ∆µ2q−1µ2q T Pµ2q+1 T ··· Pµn+2) T uµ1··· uµnlµn+1lµn+2, (D15) where now the coefficient of the symmetrized tensor product is...

work page
[4]

On the multiparticle production in high-energy collisions,

L. D. Landau, “On the multiparticle production in high-energy collisions,” Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR 17, 51 (1953)

work page 1953
[5]

Hydrodynamic theory of multiple production of particles,

Belen’kji, S.Z., Landau, “Hydrodynamic theory of multiple production of particles,” Nuovo Cim 3 (Suppl 1), 15–31 (1956) https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02745507

doi:10.1007/bf02745507 1956
[6]

Das Maxwellsche Gesetz der Geschwindigkeitsverteilung in der Relativtheorie,

F. J¨ uttner, “Das Maxwellsche Gesetz der Geschwindigkeitsverteilung in der Relativtheorie,” Ann. Phys. 339, 856 (1911) https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.19113390503

doi:10.1002/andp.19113390503 1911
[7]

Die relativistische Quantentheorie des idealen Gases,

F. J¨ uttner, “Die relativistische Quantentheorie des idealen Gases,” Z. Phys.47, 542 (1928). doi.org/10.1007/BF01340339

work page doi:10.1007/bf01340339 1928

Show all 72 references

[8]

Rezzolla and O

L. Rezzolla and O. Zanotti, Relativistic Hydrodynamics (Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom, 2013)

2013
[9]

Denicol and Dirk H

Gabriel S. Denicol and Dirk H. Rischke, Microscopic foundations of relativistic fluid dynamics , (Springer International Publishing AG, 2022)

2022
[10]

General-relativistic hydrodynamics of non-perfect fluids: 3+1 conservative formulation and application to viscous black hole accretion,

M. Chabanov, L. Rezzolla and D. H. Rischke, “General-relativistic hydrodynamics of non-perfect fluids: 3+1 conservative formulation and application to viscous black hole accretion,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 505, no.4, 5910-5940 (2021) doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1384 [arXiv:2102....

2021 arXiv
[11]

Hydrodynamic Description of the Quark-Gluon Plasma,

U. Heinz and B. Schenke, “Hydrodynamic Description of the Quark-Gluon Plasma,” [arXiv:2412.19393 [nucl-th]]

arXiv
[12]

Theories of Relativistic Dissipative Fluid Dynam- ics,

G. S. Rocha, D. Wagner, G. S. Denicol, J. Noronha and D. H. Rischke, “Theories of Relativistic Dissipative Fluid Dynam- ics,” Entropy 26, no.3, 189 (2024) doi:10.3390/e26030189 [arXiv:2311.15063 [nucl-th]]

2024 arXiv
[13]

Zum Paradoxon der Warmeleitungstheorie,

I. Muller, “Zum Paradoxon der Warmeleitungstheorie,” Z. Phys. 198, 329-344 (1967) doi:10.1007/BF01326412

1967 doi
[14]

Transient relativistic thermodynamics and kinetic theory,

W. Israel and J. M. Stewart, “Transient relativistic thermodynamics and kinetic theory,” Annals Phys.118, 341-372 (1979) doi:10.1016/0003-4916(79)90130-1

1979 doi
[15]

Stability and causality in dissipative relativistic fluids,

W. A. Hiscock and L. Lindblom, “Stability and causality in dissipative relativistic fluids,” Annals Phys. 151, 466-496 (1983) doi:10.1016/0003-4916(83)90288-9

1983 doi
[16]

Generic instabilities in first-order dissipative relativistic fluid theories,

W. A. Hiscock and L. Lindblom, “Generic instabilities in first-order dissipative relativistic fluid theories,” Phys. Rev. D 31, 725-733 (1985) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.31.725

1985 doi
[17]

Linear plane waves in dissipative relativistic fluids,

W. A. Hiscock and L. Lindblom, “Linear plane waves in dissipative relativistic fluids,” Phys. Rev. D 35, 3723-3732 (1987) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.35.3723

1987 doi
[18]

Does stability of relativistic dissipative fluid dynamics imply causality?,

S. Pu, T. Koide and D. H. Rischke, “Does stability of relativistic dissipative fluid dynamics imply causality?,” Phys. Rev. D 81, 114039 (2010) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.114039 [arXiv:0907.3906[hep-ph]]

2010 arXiv
[19]

Deconfinement transition in anisotropic matter,

H. W. Barz, B. Kampfer, B. Lukacs, K. Martinas and G. Wolf, “Deconfinement transition in anisotropic matter,” Phys. Lett. B 194, 15-19 (1987) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(87)90761-1

1987 doi
[20]

Description of the nuclear stopping process within anisotropic thermo- hydrodynamics,

B. Kampfer, B. Lukacs, G. Wolf and H. W. Barz, “Description of the nuclear stopping process within anisotropic thermo- hydrodynamics,” Phys. Lett. B 240, 297-300 (1990) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(90)91101-G

1990 doi
[21]

Anisotropic Spheres in General Relativity,

R. L. Bowers and E. P. T. Liang, “Anisotropic Spheres in General Relativity,” Astrophys. J. 188, 657-665 (1974) doi:10.1086/152760

1974 doi
[22]

Nonideal particle distributions from kinetic freezeout models,

C. Anderlik, Z. I. Lazar, V. K. Magas, L. P. Csernai, H. Stoecker and W. Greiner, “Nonideal particle distributions from kinetic freezeout models,” Phys. Rev. C 59, 388-394 (1999) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.59.388 [arXiv:nucl-th/9808024 [nucl- th]]. 37

1999 arXiv
[23]

Freezeout in hydrodynamical models,

C. Anderlik, L. P. Csernai, F. Grassi, W. Greiner, Y. Hama, T. Kodama, Z. I. Lazar, V. K. Magas and H. Stoecker, “Freezeout in hydrodynamical models,” Phys. Rev. C 59, 3309-3316 (1999) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.59.3309 [arXiv:nucl- th/9806004 [nucl-th]]

1999
[24]

Anisotropic fluid dynamics in the early stage of relativistic heavy-ion collisions,

W. Florkowski, “Anisotropic fluid dynamics in the early stage of relativistic heavy-ion collisions,” Phys. Lett. B 668, 32-35 (2008) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2008.07.101 [arXiv:0806.2268 [nucl-th]]

2008 arXiv
[25]

Highly-anisotropic and strongly-dissipative hydrodynamics for early stages of relativistic heavy-ion collisions,

W. Florkowski and R. Ryblewski, “Highly-anisotropic and strongly-dissipative hydrodynamics for early stages of relativistic heavy-ion collisions,” Phys. Rev. C 83, 034907 (2011) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.83.034907 [arXiv:1007.0130 [nucl-th]]

2011 arXiv
[26]

Non-boost-invariant motion of dissipative and highly anisotropic fluid,

R. Ryblewski and W. Florkowski, “Non-boost-invariant motion of dissipative and highly anisotropic fluid,” J. Phys. G 38, 015104 (2011) doi:10.1088/0954-3899/38/1/015104 [arXiv:1007.4662 [nucl-th]]

2011 arXiv
[27]

Highly-anisotropic and strongly-dissipative hydrodynamics with transverse expansion,

R. Ryblewski and W. Florkowski, “Highly-anisotropic and strongly-dissipative hydrodynamics with transverse expansion,” Eur. Phys. J. C 71, 1761 (2011) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1761-8 [arXiv:1103.1260 [nucl-th]]

2011 arXiv
[28]

Highly-anisotropic hydrodynamics in 3+1 space-time dimensions,

R. Ryblewski and W. Florkowski, “Highly-anisotropic hydrodynamics in 3+1 space-time dimensions,” Phys. Rev. C 85, 064901 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.85.064901 [arXiv:1204.2624 [nucl-th]]

2012 arXiv
[29]

Matching pre-equilibrium dynamics and viscous hydrodynamics,

M. Martinez and M. Strickland, “Matching pre-equilibrium dynamics and viscous hydrodynamics,” Phys. Rev. C 81, 024906 (2010) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.81.024906 [arXiv:0909.0264 [hep-ph]]

2010 arXiv
[30]

Dissipative Dynamics of Highly Anisotropic Systems,

M. Martinez and M. Strickland, “Dissipative Dynamics of Highly Anisotropic Systems,” Nucl. Phys. A 848, 183-197 (2010) doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2010.08.011 [arXiv:1007.0889 [nucl-th]]

2010 arXiv
[31]

Non-boost-invariant anisotropic dynamics,

M. Martinez and M. Strickland, “Non-boost-invariant anisotropic dynamics,” Nucl. Phys. A 856, 68-87 (2011) doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2011.02.003 [arXiv:1011.3056 [nucl-th]]

2011 arXiv
[32]

Testing viscous and anisotropic hydrodynamics in an exactly solvable case,

W. Florkowski, R. Ryblewski and M. Strickland, “Testing viscous and anisotropic hydrodynamics in an exactly solvable case,” Phys. Rev. C 88, 024903 (2013) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.88.024903 [arXiv:1305.7234 [nucl-th]]

2013 arXiv
[33]

Anisotropic matching principle for the hydrodynamic expansion,

L. Tinti, “Anisotropic matching principle for the hydrodynamic expansion,” Phys. Rev. C 94, no.4, 044902 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.94.044902 [arXiv:1506.07164 [hep-ph]]

2016 arXiv
[34]

Relativistic anisotropic hydrodynamics,

M. Alqahtani, M. Nopoush and M. Strickland, “Relativistic anisotropic hydrodynamics,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 101, 204-248 (2018) doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2018.05.004 [arXiv:1712.03282 [nucl-th]]

2018 arXiv
[35]

Second-order (2+1)-dimensional anisotropic hydrodynamics,

D. Bazow, U. W. Heinz and M. Strickland, “Second-order (2+1)-dimensional anisotropic hydrodynamics,” Phys. Rev. C 90, no.5, 054910 (2014) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.90.054910 [arXiv:1311.6720 [nucl-th]]

2014 arXiv
[36]

Derivation of anisotropic dissipative fluid dynamics from the Boltzmann equation,

E. Molnar, H. Niemi and D. H. Rischke, “Derivation of anisotropic dissipative fluid dynamics from the Boltzmann equation,” Phys. Rev. D 93, no.11, 114025 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.114025 [arXiv:1602.00573 [nucl-th]]

2016 arXiv
[37]

Higher-order dissipative anisotropic magnetohydrodynamics from the Boltzmann-Vlasov equation,

E. Moln´ ar and D. H. Rischke, “Higher-order dissipative anisotropic magnetohydrodynamics from the Boltzmann-Vlasov equation,” Phys. Rev. D 111, no.3, 036035 (2025) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.036035

2025 doi
[38]

Some properties of Boltzmann’s equation for Maxwell molecules,

A. V. Bobylev, “Some properties of Boltzmann’s equation for Maxwell molecules,” Sov. Phys. Dokl. 20, 820 (1976)

1976
[39]

Formation of Maxwellian Tails,

M. Krook and T. T. Wu, “Formation of Maxwellian Tails,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 36, 1107 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.36.1107

1976 doi
[40]

Exact solutions of the Boltzmann equation,

M. Krook and T. T. Wu, “Exact solutions of the Boltzmann equation,” Physics of Fluids 20, 1589 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.861780

1977 doi
[41]

Analytic solution of the Boltzmann equation in an expanding system,

D. Bazow, G. S. Denicol, U. Heinz, M. Martinez and J. Noronha, “Analytic solution of the Boltzmann equation in an expanding system,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, no.2, 022301 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.022301 [arXiv:1507.07834 [hep-ph]]

2016 arXiv
[42]

Nonlinear dynamics from the relativistic Boltz- mann equation in the Friedmann-Lemaˆ ıtre-Robertson-Walker spacetime,

D. Bazow, G. S. Denicol, U. Heinz, M. Martinez and J. Noronha, “Nonlinear dynamics from the relativistic Boltz- mann equation in the Friedmann-Lemaˆ ıtre-Robertson-Walker spacetime,” Phys. Rev. D 94, no.12, 125006 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.125006 [arXiv:1607.05245 [hep-ph]]

2016 arXiv
[43]

Closing the equations of motion of anisotropic fluid dynamics by a judicious choice of a moment of the Boltzmann equation,

E. Moln´ ar, H. Niemi and D. H. Rischke, “Closing the equations of motion of anisotropic fluid dynamics by a judicious choice of a moment of the Boltzmann equation,” Phys. Rev. D 94, no.12, 125003 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.125003 [arXiv:1606.09019 [nucl-th]]

2016 arXiv
[44]

The right choice of moment for anisotropic fluid dynamics,

H. Niemi, E. Moln´ ar and D. H. Rischke, “The right choice of moment for anisotropic fluid dynamics,” Nucl. Phys. A 967, 409-412 (2017) doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2017.05.038 [arXiv:1705.01851 [nucl-th]]

2017 arXiv
[45]

Collective modes of an anisotropic quark gluon plasma,

P. Romatschke and M. Strickland, “Collective modes of an anisotropic quark gluon plasma,” Phys. Rev. D 68, 036004 (2003) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.036004 [arXiv:hep-ph/0304092 [hep-ph]]

2003 arXiv
[46]

A relativistic relaxation-time model for the Boltzmann equation,

J. L. Anderson and H. R. Witting, “A relativistic relaxation-time model for the Boltzmann equation,” Physica 74, no.3, 466-488 (1974) doi:10.1016/0031-8914(74)90355-3

1974 doi
[47]

de Groot, W.A

S.R. de Groot, W.A. van Leeuwen and Ch.G. van Weert, Relativistic Kinetic Theory - Principles and applications , (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1980)

1980
[48]

Cercignani and G.M

C. Cercignani and G.M. Kremer, The Relativistic Boltzmann Equation: Theory and Applications , (Birkh¨ auser, Basel, 2002)

2002
[49]

Relativistic hydrodynamics and thermodynamics of anisotropic plasmas,

M. Gedalin, “Relativistic hydrodynamics and thermodynamics of anisotropic plasmas,” Phys. Fluids B 3, 1871 (1991) https://doi.org/10.1063/1.859656

1991 doi
[50]

Generally covariant relativistic anisotropic magnetohydrodynamics,

M. Gedalin and I. Oiberman, “Generally covariant relativistic anisotropic magnetohydrodynamics,” Phys. Rev. E 51, 4901 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.51.4901

1995 doi
[51]

Kubo formulae for relativistic fluids in strong magnetic fields,

X. G. Huang, A. Sedrakian and D. H. Rischke, “Kubo formulae for relativistic fluids in strong magnetic fields,” Annals Phys. 326, 3075-3094 (2011) doi:10.1016/j.aop.2011.08.001 [arXiv:1108.0602 [astro-ph.HE]]

2011 arXiv
[53]

Landau and E.M

L.D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz, Fluid Dynamics, Second Edition, (Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 1987)

1987
[54]

Relative importance of second-order terms in relativistic dissipative 38 fluid dynamics,

E. Moln´ ar, H. Niemi, G. S. Denicol and D. H. Rischke, “Relative importance of second-order terms in relativistic dissipative 38 fluid dynamics,” Phys. Rev. D 89, no.7, 074010 (2014) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.074010 [arXiv:1308.0785 [nucl-th]]

2014 arXiv
[55]

Analytical structure of the binary collision integral and the ultrarelativistic limit of transport coefficients of an ideal gas,

D. Wagner, V. E. Ambrus and E. Molnar, “Analytical structure of the binary collision integral and the ultrarelativistic limit of transport coefficients of an ideal gas,” Phys. Rev. D 109, no.5, 056018 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.056018 [arXiv:2309.09335 [physics.flu-dyn]]

2024 arXiv
[56]

The Thermodynamics of irreversible processes. 3.. Relativistic theory of the simple fluid,

C. Eckart, “The Thermodynamics of irreversible processes. 3.. Relativistic theory of the simple fluid,” Phys. Rev. 58, 919-924 (1940) doi:10.1103/PhysRev.58.919

1940 doi
[57]

A model for collision processes in gases. I. Small amplitude processes in charged and neutral one-component systems,

P. L. Bhatnagar, E. P. Gross, and M. Krook. “A model for collision processes in gases. I. Small amplitude processes in charged and neutral one-component systems,” Phys. Rev. 94: 511 (1954) doi:10.1103/PhysRev.94.511

1954 doi
[58]

Transport coefficients of second-order relativistic fluid dynamics in the relaxation-time approximation,

V. E. Ambrus, E. Moln´ ar and D. H. Rischke, “Transport coefficients of second-order relativistic fluid dynamics in the relaxation-time approximation,” Phys. Rev. D 106, no.7, 076005 (2022) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.076005 [arXiv:2207.05670 [nucl-th]]

2022 arXiv
[59]

Highly Relativistic Nucleus-Nucleus Collisions: The Central Rapidity Region,

J. D. Bjorken, “Highly Relativistic Nucleus-Nucleus Collisions: The Central Rapidity Region,” Phys. Rev. D 27, 140-151 (1983) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.27.140

1983 doi
[60]

Relativistic second-order dissipative and anisotropic fluid dynamics in the relaxation-time approximation for an ideal gas of massive particles,

V. E. Ambru¸ s, E. Moln´ ar and D. H. Rischke, “Relativistic second-order dissipative and anisotropic fluid dynamics in the relaxation-time approximation for an ideal gas of massive particles,” Phys. Rev. D 109, no.7, 076001 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.076001 [arXiv:2311.0...

2024 arXiv
[61]

Solving the heat-flow prob- lem with transient relativistic fluid dynamics,

G. S. Denicol, H. Niemi, I. Bouras, E. Molnar, Z. Xu, D. H. Rischke and C. Greiner, “Solving the heat-flow prob- lem with transient relativistic fluid dynamics,” Phys. Rev. D 89, no.7, 074005 (2014) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.074005 [arXiv:1207.6811 [nucl-th]]

2014 arXiv
[62]

Shakhov-type extension of the relaxation time approximation in relativistic kinetic theory and second-order fluid dynamics,

V. E. Ambru¸ s and E. Moln´ ar, “Shakhov-type extension of the relaxation time approximation in relativistic kinetic theory and second-order fluid dynamics,” Phys. Lett. B 855, 138795 (2024) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.138795 [arXiv:2311.11603 [nucl-th]]

2024
[63]

High-order Shakhov-like extension of the relaxation time approximation in relativistic kinetic theory,

V. E. Ambru¸ s and D. Wagner, “High-order Shakhov-like extension of the relaxation time approximation in relativistic kinetic theory,” Phys. Rev. D 110, no.5, 056002 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.056002 [arXiv:2401.04017 [nucl-th]]

2024 arXiv
[64]

Investigation of shock waves in the relativistic Riemann problem: A Comparison of viscous fluid dynamics to kinetic theory,

I. Bouras, E. Molnar, H. Niemi, Z. Xu, A. El, O. Fochler, C. Greiner and D. H. Rischke, “Investigation of shock waves in the relativistic Riemann problem: A Comparison of viscous fluid dynamics to kinetic theory,” Phys. Rev. C 82, 024910 (2010) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.82.024910 [...

2010 arXiv
[65]

Exploring the applicability of dissipative fluid dynamics to small systems by comparison to the Boltzmann equation,

K. Gallmeister, H. Niemi, C. Greiner and D. H. Rischke, “Exploring the applicability of dissipative fluid dynamics to small systems by comparison to the Boltzmann equation,” Phys. Rev. C98, no.2, 024912 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.98.024912 [arXiv:1804.09512 [nucl-th]]

2018 arXiv
[66]

Quasiparticle anisotropic hydrodynamics,

M. Alqahtani and M. Strickland, “Quasiparticle anisotropic hydrodynamics,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 832, no.1, 012051 (2017) doi:10.1088/1742-6596/832/1/012051 [arXiv:1610.07643 [nucl-th]]

2017 arXiv
[67]

Phenomenological predictions of 3+1d anisotropic hydrodynamics,

M. Nopoush, M. Strickland and R. Ryblewski, “Phenomenological predictions of 3+1d anisotropic hydrodynamics,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 832, no.1, 012054 (2017) doi:10.1088/1742-6596/832/1/012054 [arXiv:1610.10055 [nucl-th]]

2017 arXiv
[68]

(3+1)D Quasiparticle Anisotropic Hydrodynamics for Ultrarelativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions,

M. Alqahtani, M. Nopoush, R. Ryblewski and M. Strickland, “(3+1)D Quasiparticle Anisotropic Hydrodynamics for Ultrarelativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, no.4, 042301 (2017) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.042301 [arXiv:1703.05808 [nucl-th]]

2017 arXiv
[69]

Anisotropic hydrodynamic modeling of 2.76 TeV Pb-Pb collisions,

M. Alqahtani, M. Nopoush, R. Ryblewski and M. Strickland, “Anisotropic hydrodynamic modeling of 2.76 TeV Pb-Pb collisions,” Phys. Rev. C 96, no.4, 044910 (2017) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.96.044910 [arXiv:1705.10191 [nucl-th]]

2017 arXiv
[70]

Bulk observables at 5.02 TeV using quasiparticle anisotropic hydrodynamics,

M. Alqahtani and M. Strickland, “Bulk observables at 5.02 TeV using quasiparticle anisotropic hydrodynamics,” Eur. Phys. J. C 81, no.11, 1022 (2021) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09832-z [arXiv:2008.07657 [nucl-th]]

2021 arXiv
[71]

Bottomonium suppression in 5.02 and 8.16 TeV p-Pb collisions,

M. Strickland, S. Thapa and R. Vogt, “Bottomonium suppression in 5.02 and 8.16 TeV p-Pb collisions,” Phys. Rev. D 109, no.9, 096016 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.096016 [arXiv:2401.16704 [nucl-th]]

2024 arXiv
[72]

MaTeX - LaTeX typesetting in Mathematica,

Szabolcs Horv´ at, “MaTeX - LaTeX typesetting in Mathematica,” https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10828124

doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [52]

Dissipation flow-frames: particle, energy, thermometer,

P. V´ an and T. S. Bir´ o, “Dissipation flow-frames: particle, energy, thermometer,” [arXiv:1305.3190 [gr-qc]]

arXiv

[2] [1]

(42) into Eq

The ˆGn0 gain terms The simplest gain term ˆGn0 is computed by inserting Eq. (42) into Eq. (60), and hence, for i = n and j = 0 we have ˆGn0 = Z KK′ ˆf0k ˆf0k′ ⌊n/2⌋X q=0 (−1)qbnqBnq∆(µ1µ2 T ··· ∆µ2q−1µ2q T Pµ2q+1 T ··· Pµn) T uµ1··· uµn. (D1) Now note that the contraction of the symmetrized tensor product by uµ1··· uµn leads to ∆(µ1µ2 T ··· ∆µ2q−1µ2q T P...

work page

[3] [2]

The ˆGn1 gain terms The ˆGn1 gain term differs from the ˆGn0 gain term since it contains one projection in the direction of the anisotropy, ˆGn1 =− Z KK′ ˆf0k ˆf0k′ ⌊(n+1)/2⌋X q=0 (−1)qbn+1,qBn+1,q∆(µ1µ2 T ··· ∆µ2q−1µ2q T Pµ2q+1 T ··· Pµn+1) T uµ1··· uµnlµn+1, (D9) where the coefficient of distinct terms in the symmetrized tensor product is bn+1,q≡ (n+1)!...

work page

[4] [3]

The ˆGn2 gain terms The last gain term of interest is a generalization of our previous results, now including two projections in the direction of the anisotropy, ˆGn2 = Z dKdK′ ˆf0k ˆf0k′ ⌊(n+2)/2⌋X q=0 (−1)qbn+2,qBn+2,q∆(µ1µ2 T ··· ∆µ2q−1µ2q T Pµ2q+1 T ··· Pµn+2) T uµ1··· uµnlµn+1lµn+2, (D15) where now the coefficient of the symmetrized tensor product is...

work page

[5] [4]

On the multiparticle production in high-energy collisions,

L. D. Landau, “On the multiparticle production in high-energy collisions,” Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR 17, 51 (1953)

work page 1953

[6] [5]

Hydrodynamic theory of multiple production of particles,

Belen’kji, S.Z., Landau, “Hydrodynamic theory of multiple production of particles,” Nuovo Cim 3 (Suppl 1), 15–31 (1956) https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02745507

doi:10.1007/bf02745507 1956

[7] [6]

Das Maxwellsche Gesetz der Geschwindigkeitsverteilung in der Relativtheorie,

F. J¨ uttner, “Das Maxwellsche Gesetz der Geschwindigkeitsverteilung in der Relativtheorie,” Ann. Phys. 339, 856 (1911) https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.19113390503

doi:10.1002/andp.19113390503 1911

[8] [7]

Die relativistische Quantentheorie des idealen Gases,

F. J¨ uttner, “Die relativistische Quantentheorie des idealen Gases,” Z. Phys.47, 542 (1928). doi.org/10.1007/BF01340339

work page doi:10.1007/bf01340339 1928