Dynamic scaling of vorticity in phase-separating superfluid mixtures

Hiromitsu Takeuchi; Ryuta Ito

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 56 references

Dynamic scaling of vorticity in phase-separating superfluid mixtures

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper shows that the vorticity structure factor in phase-separating superfluid mixtures obeys a dynamic scaling law with exponent $\alpha=1$, and that the vortex energy decays as $K(t)\sim t^{-2/3}\ln t$, linking phase-ordering…

desk verdict A credible first look at vorticity scaling in phase-separating superfluids, with the advertised t^{-2/3} ln t decay resting on an imposed exponent rather than a measured one. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.04079 v2 pith:E7VVUMM7 submitted 2025-05-07 cond-mat.quant-gas

Ryuta Ito , Hiromitsu Takeuchi This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.quant-gas

keywords dynamicscalingvorticitystructurefactorphaseseparationsuperfluidmixturesenergyspectrumquantumturbulenceGross-PitaevskiiBose-Einsteincondensate

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 aims to show that vorticity, not just the magnetization domains, in a phase-separating two-component superfluid follows a dynamic scaling law in the late, inertia-dominated stage. The authors find that the vorticity structure factor $S_v(k,t)$ collapses onto a single time-independent curve when scaled by the characteristic domain size $l(t)$ with exponent $\alpha=1$. They further derive that the total vortex energy decays as $K(t)\sim t^{-2/3}\ln t$, a law that is distinguishable from ordinary freely decaying turbulence. Because the system they simulate is the same regime realized in recent $^7$Li Bose-Einstein condensate experiments, the prediction is directly testable. The result connects phase-ordering kinetics—usually studied through order-parameter structure factors—with fluid-turbulence statistics.

What carries the argument

The central object is the vorticity structure factor $S_v(k,t)=\langle|\hat{\omega}(k,t)|^2\rangle$, the angular-averaged power spectrum of the two-dimensional vorticity field, together with its companion energy spectrum $E(k,t)=L^2 S_v/(4\pi k)$ borrowed from fluid turbulence. The argument runs through the dynamic hierarchy hypothesis: on scales larger than the domain size $l$ the spectrum has one power-law exponent $a$, and on scales between $l$ and the healing length $\xi$ it has another exponent $b$. The load-bearing ansatz is $\widetilde{E}(\tilde{k})=2\widetilde{E}_0\tilde{k}^{\,a}/(1+\tilde{k}^{\,a-b})$ for the universal function, which interpolates between the two regimes, keeps the peak pinned at $\widetilde{E}_0$, and lets the decay law be computed analytically.

What would settle it

Measure the high-wavenumber slope $b$ of the energy spectrum at $l/\xi$ well beyond 30 in a higher-resolution simulation, or extract the vortex energy decay from a $^7$Li phase-separation experiment over a full decade of time: if $|b|$ saturates near 2 instead of 1, or the energy decay is better fit by a pure power law $t^{-p}$ with no logarithmic factor, the central scaling and decay predictions fail.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using numerical simulations of the Gross-Pitaevskii model, the paper establishes that in the inertial hydrodynamic stage ($l/\xi\gtrsim 30$) the vorticity structure factor satisfies the dynamic scaling law $S_v(k,t) l(t)^{\alpha}$ equals a universal function of $kl$ with $\alpha=1$. The central observation is that the peak $E_0$ of the energy spectrum $E(k,t)=L^2 S_v(k,t)/(4\pi k)$ stays constant in time, so the rescaled spectrum collapses onto one curve. The universal spectrum has two power-law regimes: macroscopic scales behave as $\tilde{k}^{\,a}$ with $a=2.35(4)$, while microscopic scales approach $\tilde{k}^{-1}$, the signature of an uncorrelated distribution of point vortices. Combining these regimes through the ansatz $\widetilde{E}(\tilde{k})=2\widetilde{E}_0\tilde{k}^{\,a}/(1+\tilde{k}^{\,a-b})$ with $b=-1$ yields the vortex energy decay $K(t)\sim t^{-2/3}\ln t$, which the numerics support in the late stage.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that in the late stage the high-wavenumber vorticity is an uncorrelated distribution of point vortices, so the microscopic spectral exponent is exactly $b=-1$; the numerics only show the slope gradually approaching $-1$, and if it were closer to $-2$ the derived logarithmic correction in the decay law would disappear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The vorticity statistics of a phase-separating superfluid mixture become statistically self-similar in the late stage, so the full two-point vorticity distribution is determined by the domain-size length $l(t)$ up to one scale exponent $\alpha=1$.
The peak of the energy spectrum staying constant gives an experimental marker for the inertial hydrodynamic stage that does not require measuring the domain-wall length.
The vortex energy decays as $K(t)\sim t^{-2/3}\ln t$, which is slower than the power laws $K(t)\sim t^{-1}$ to $t^{-1.2}$ of freely decaying classical turbulence, providing a clean distinguishing prediction.
Late-stage small-scale vorticity behaves as an uncorrelated set of point vortices, giving $E(k)\sim k^{-1}$; if vortex sheets dominated instead, the slope would be $-2$.
The theory applies directly to $^7$Li ferromagnetic condensates under strong quadratic Zeeman shift, where the predicted scaling can be checked against the observed $1/z=2/3$ phase-separation dynamics.

Reading between the lines

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

If the $\alpha=1$ collapse is generic, the same rescaling should hold in other immiscible two-component BECs and in binary classical fluids with vortex-sheet-like interfaces; looking for a log-corrected energy decay in those systems would test the universality class.
The $b=-1$ assumption could be probed by measuring the microscopic-regime slope at larger $l/\xi$ than simulated; a gradual drift toward $-2$ at higher resolution would indicate that vortex sheets, not point vortices, dominate the smallest scales and would erase the logarithmic factor.
A practical consequence for cold-atom experiments: the constancy of the spectral peak $E_0$ could be used as a calibration-free way to identify the inertial hydrodynamic stage, even when the domain-wall length is difficult to extract from absorption images.
Connecting to turbulence theory, the logarithmic correction may be the observable remnant of the finite healing-length cutoff; experiments with different interaction strengths (hence different $\xi$) could vary the crossover window in which the $t^{-2/3}\ln t$ law is visible.

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

The genuinely new thing here is the target quantity, not the machinery. Prior work on dynamic scaling in these mixtures focused on the magnetization structure factor; this paper studies the vorticity structure factor and its associated energy spectrum. The numerical observation that the rescaled energy spectrum collapses with alpha = 1 in the late stage is plausible and well supported by Fig. 2(b,d). The energy-decay law K ~ t^{-2/3} ln t is a concrete, falsifiable prediction that distinguishes this system from ordinary free decay, and it is clearly presented. The paper is honest about its limitations: it notes early-stage data do not collapse, it notes the microscopic exponent b is assigned by physical interpretation rather than measured, and it attributes the late-time discrepancy to noise accumulation. Those self-critical statements are worth taking at face value.

The soft spot is the log correction. Equation (12) depends on setting b = -1, which the paper justifies by invoking an uncorrelated distribution of point vortices. But the measured slope approaches -1 only gradually, and the text admits the prediction 'partially explains' the data. If b is actually less than -1, the integral saturates and the log factor disappears, leaving an ordinary t^{-2/3} law that would not distinguish this from freely decaying turbulence. The authors do not provide a sensitivity analysis. This is a load-bearing weakness, but not a fatal one, because the scaling collapse itself and the qualitative decay trend do not hinge on the precise value of b. What is missing is a statement of how robust Eq. (12) is to b in [-1.2, -0.8] or an attempt to measure b more precisely in the late stage.

The citation pattern looks fair. The paper builds on the authors' own prior work, but the relevant prior results are there and the experiment [17] is cited. No obvious stretching. The absence of code or data archive is a minor complaint for a Letter, though the community would benefit from it.

Who should read this: anyone working on phase-ordering kinetics in superfluids, especially the 7Li experiments. It deserves a serious referee — not a desk reject — because the new quantity, the scaling observation, and the analytic decay law are worth checking, and the sensitivity issue can be fixed in revision. My own recommendation is conditional acceptance with the request to add a sensitivity analysis for b and a clearer statement of the uncertainty in the log factor.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the vorticity structure factor in phase-separating binary superfluid mixtures using two-dimensional Gross-Pitaevskii simulations. The authors observe that the peak of the energy spectrum E(k,t) is nearly time-independent in the inertial hydrodynamic stage, which implies a scale exponent α=1 in the proposed dynamic scaling form S_v(k,t) l(t)^α = \tilde S_v(kl). They demonstrate a data collapse for the vorticity structure factor and the energy spectrum in the late stage. They further introduce an interpolating ansatz for the energy spectrum with exponents a and b, set b=-1 from the assumption of an uncorrelated point-vortex distribution, and derive a decay law K(t) ~ t^{-2/3} ln t for the vortex energy, which they compare with numerical data.

Significance. If the scaling law holds, this is an interesting extension of dynamic scaling to vorticity in phase-separating superfluids, connecting phase-ordering kinetics with turbulence theory and directly relevant to recent experiments on 7Li BECs. The numerical collision of the structure factor and the connection to known spectral exponents are the paper's main strengths. The proposed decay law is falsifiable but currently rests on the unmeasured exponent b=-1; the logarithmic correction is sensitive to that value. The manuscript also contains a normalization inconsistency in Eq. (9) that affects the quantitative comparison. The core scaling-law result is plausible and worth publishing after the quantitative issues are resolved.

major comments (2)

[Energy Decay Law / Eq. (12) / Appendix D] The exponent b is imposed as -1 rather than measured from the late-time spectra. The logarithmic correction in Eq. (12) follows only for b=-1; for any b<-1 the high-wavenumber integral saturates and K(t) ~ t^{-2/3} without the log factor. Because the theoretical curve in Fig. 3(b) uses b=-1, the comparison does not independently test the log-corrected decay law. Please measure b from the late-stage slope in the microscopic regime (e.g., the local exponent in 4 < \tilde k < 20 at the largest times) and provide a sensitivity test for b near -1. If b is not accurately determined, the abstract and summary should state the decay law as conditional on this exponent.
[Dynamic Scaling Plots / Eq. (9) / Appendix D] The ansatz (9) is described as taking its maximum value \tilde E_0, but for the quoted fit a=2.35 and b=-1, the maximum of 2 \tilde k^a/(1+\tilde k^{a-b}) is about 1.09 \tilde E_0 at \tilde k ≈ 1.29, not \tilde E_0. Since Appendix D sets \tilde E_0 to the observed max(\tilde E), the ansatz normalization is inconsistent with the data. This affects the prefactor in Eq. (10) and the quantitative comparison in Fig. 3(b). Please correct the normalization of Eq. (9) or redefine \tilde E_0 accordingly, and re-evaluate the agreement.

minor comments (5)

[Fig. 1 caption / Appendix A] The Fig. 1 caption states a system size of 512ξ on each side, while Appendix A gives L/Δx = 4096 and Δx/ξ = 0.5, implying L = 2048ξ. Please reconcile these values.
[Energy Decay Law] The quantity K(t) is called the vortex energy, but the system conserves total energy; K(t) is the spectral energy in the wavenumber band [1/L, 1/ξ] and decays because the spectral peak moves to lower wavenumbers. Please clarify this distinction in the main text.
[Dynamic Scaling Plots] The collapse in Fig. 2(d) is asserted visually. A quantitative measure of the spread of the rescaled curves (e.g., a residual or a collapse metric) over the claimed scaling window would strengthen the evidence for the α=1 law.
[Energy Decay Law / Fig. 3(a)] The sentence 'This prediction partially explains the time evolution of slope in Fig. 3(a)' is vague. Please specify which features of the measured slope evolution are captured by the picture of a crossover from vortex sheets to point vortices, and which are not.
[Fig. 3(b) and Summary] The late-time discrepancy in Fig. 3(b) is attributed to noise accumulation at the resolution scale. Please provide supporting evidence, such as a plot of the spectrum at high k becoming flat or white-noise-like at the final times.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The t^{-2/3} ln t decay law is validated by integrating the same fitted spectra used to set its parameters; with b=-1 imposed by physical interpretation, the Fig. 3(b) agreement is a consistency check rather than an independent prediction.

fitted input called prediction [Energy Decay Law (Eqs. 9-12, Fig. 3(b)); Appendix D]
"The ansatz for universal function of the energy spectrum [Eq. (9)] has three fitting parameters ˜E0, a and b. Figure 3(b) compares the numerical data plot of the vortex energy with the theoretical results based on Eqs. (10) and (9) with b = −1."

The 'theoretical' K(t) curve is obtained by integrating the fitted scaling function: E0 is the measured late-stage peak height, a is a least-squares slope from the same spectra, and b=-1 is imposed by physical interpretation. The integrated curve therefore cannot independently validate the decay law; it is a self-consistency check of the fit. In particular, the advertised log factor arises because b=-1 makes the high-k integral effectively ∫dk/k, so the t^{-2/3} ln t law is an output of the assumed b, not of an independent measurement.

full rationale

The basic dynamic-scaling statement α=1 is not definitionally circular: the authors observe that the peak of E(k,t) is time-independent and then show that with α=1 the whole structure factor collapses; that is a genuine empirical curve collapse. The circularity is confined to the energy-decay validation. The analytic decay law K(t) in Eqs. (10)-(12) is computed from the ansatz Eq. (9), whose constants are all taken from the same spectra (E0 and a are fitted; b=-1 is set by physical interpretation). Fig. 3(b) then compares this integrated fit with K(t), so the agreement is a consistency check rather than an independent test. The headline t^{-2/3} ln t behavior exists only for b=-1; the paper itself admits that the slope prediction only 'partially explains the time evolution of slope in Fig. 3(a)' and that b is determined 'based on a physical interpretation.' The self-cited prior-work chain (Refs. [13,31]) is load-bearing for this b choice, which further weakens the claimed independence of the decay law. This reduces the force of the claimed decay law but does not invalidate the scaling collapse or the early-stage power-law observations, which are directly empirical.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the scaling hypothesis and the specific interpolation ansatz with three parameters (E0, a, b). The ansatz and the choice of b are the main ad hoc inputs; the other assumptions are standard in the field.

free parameters (3)

E0 = 5.46(13) × 10^12
Peak of the rescaled energy spectrum, averaged over the late stage; sets the amplitude of the universal function and the energy decay law.
a = 2.35(4)
Power-law exponent in the macroscopic regime, fitted by least squares to early-stage data in 0.1 < k~ < 0.5.
b = -1
Power-law exponent in the microscopic regime, set to -1 from the physical reasoning that high-wavenumber vorticity is an uncorrelated distribution of point vortices; not directly fitted.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Dynamic scaling hypothesis: the vorticity structure factor can be rescaled by l(t)^α to a time-independent universal function (Eq. (3)).
This is the foundational premise of the analysis, standard in phase-ordering kinetics but not proven for vorticity.
domain assumption Asymptotic power-law forms of the universal functions in macroscopic and microscopic regimes (Eq. (5)).
Assumed forms inspired by percolation criticality and the hierarchy of length scales.
ad hoc to paper The interpolation ansatz for the energy spectrum, Eq. (9): E~(k~) = 2 E0 k~^a / (1 + k~^{a-b}).
This specific functional form is introduced to connect the two power-law regimes and is not derived from first principles.
ad hoc to paper b = -1 from the assumption of uncorrelated point-vortex distribution at high wavenumbers.
The late-stage slope approaches -1, but the exact value is justified by physical reasoning about vortex arrangement, not by a firm measurement or derivation.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamic scaling of vorticity in phase-separating superfluid mixtures." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/E7VVUMM7

@misc{pith2026250504079,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamic scaling of vorticity in phase-separating superfluid mixtures},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/E7VVUMM7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.04079}
}

abstract

Recently, it has been experimentally confirmed that non-equilibrium dynamics of phase separation in strongly ferromagnetic Bose-Einstein condensates of $^7$Li atoms obey the dynamic scaling law belonging to the binary-fluid universality class in the inertial hydrodynamic stage. The current work theoretically and numerically studies the dynamic scaling law of structure factor of vorticity in a phase-separating binary superfluid mixture, equivalent to the $^7$Li condensates in a strong limit of quadratic Zeeman shift. We found a dynamic scaling law for the structure factor based on our numerical observation that the peak of the energy spectrum from turbulence theory does not vary in time in the stage. Similarly to freely decaying turbulence, a power-law hierarchy exists in the energy spectrum in our system, and we proposed a decay law of the energy based on the dynamic scaling law by introducing the microscopic, high-wavenumber cutoff.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.04079 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. (Color online) The plots of the energy spectrum (a) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. (a) (Color online) The time evolution of the maximum value [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages

[17]

S. Huh, K. Mukherjee, K. Kwon, J. Seo, J. Hur, S. I. Mistakidis, H. R. Sadeghpour, and J.-y. Choi, Nat. Phys.20, 402 (2024)

work page 2024
[1]

A. J. Bray, Adv. Phys. 43, 357 (1994)

1994
[2]

J. D. Gunton, R. Toral, and A. Chakrabarti, Physica Scripta 1990, 12 (1990)

work page 1990
[3]

B. A. Camley and F. L. H. Brown, The Journal of Chemical Physics 135, 225106 (2011)

work page 2011
[4]

J. K. Ho ffer and D. N. Sinha, Phys. Rev. A 33, 1918 (1986)

work page 1986
[5]

Damle, S

K. Damle, S. N. Majumdar, and S. Sachdev, Phys. Rev. A 54, 5037 (1996)

work page 1996
[6]

Takeuchi, K

H. Takeuchi, K. Kasamatsu, M. Tsubota, and M. Nitta, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 245301 (2012)

work page 2012
[7]

Kudo and Y

K. Kudo and Y . Kawaguchi, Phys. Rev. A88, 013630 (2013)

work page 2013

Show all 56 references

[8]

Hofmann, S

J. Hofmann, S. S. Natu, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 095702 (2014)

2014
[9]

Kudo and Y

K. Kudo and Y . Kawaguchi, Phys. Rev. A91, 053609 (2015)

2015
[10]

L. A. Williamson and P. B. Blakie, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 025301 (2016)

2016
[11]

L. A. Williamson and P. B. Blakie, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 255301 (2017)

2017
[12]

Karl and T

M. Karl and T. Gasenzer, New Journal of Physics 19, 093014 (2017)

2017
[13]

Takeuchi, Phys

H. Takeuchi, Phys. Rev. A 97, 013617 (2018)

2018
[14]

L. A. Williamson and P. B. Blakie, SciPost Phys.7, 029 (2019)

2019
[15]

Fujimoto, K

K. Fujimoto, K. Haneda, K. Kudo, and Y . Kawaguchi, Phys. Rev. A 101, 023608 (2020)

2020
[16]

L. A. Williamson and P. B. Blakie, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 013154 (2021)

2021
[18]

H. C. Burstyn, J. V . Sengers, J. K. Bhattacharjee, and R. A. Ferrell, Phys. Rev. A 28, 1567 (1983)

1983
[19]

Furukawa, Phys

H. Furukawa, Phys. Rev. A 31, 1103 (1985)

1985
[20]

J. E. Farrell and O. T. Valls, Phys. Rev. B 40, 7027 (1989). 6

1989
[21]

F. J. Alexander, S. Chen, and D. W. Grunau, Phys. Rev. B 48, 634 (1993)

1993
[22]

A. Xu, G. Gonnella, A. Lamura, G. Amati, and F. Massaioli, Europhysics Letters 71, 651 (2005)

2005
[23]

Ahmad, F

S. Ahmad, F. Corberi, S. K. Das, E. Lippiello, S. Puri, and M. Zannetti, Phys. Rev. E 86, 061129 (2012)

2012
[24]

Shimizu and H

R. Shimizu and H. Tanaka, Nat. Commun. 6, 7047 (2015)

2015
[25]

Chattopadhyay, J

C. Chattopadhyay, J. Ott, T. Sch¨afer, and V . Skokov, Phys. Rev. D 108, 074004 (2023)

2023
[26]

J. J. Arenzon, A. J. Bray, L. F. Cugliandolo, and A. Sicilia, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 145701 (2007)

2007
[27]

Barros, P

K. Barros, P. L. Krapivsky, and S. Redner, Phys. Rev. E 80, 040101 (2009)

2009
[28]

Takeuchi, Y

H. Takeuchi, Y . Mizuno, and K. Dehara, Phys. Rev. A 92, 043608 (2015)

2015
[29]

Takeuchi, N

H. Takeuchi, N. Suzuki, K. Kasamatsu, H. Saito, and M. Tsub- ota, Phys. Rev. B 81, 094517 (2010)

2010
[30]

Kokubo, K

H. Kokubo, K. Kasamatsu, and H. Takeuchi, Phys. Rev. A 104, 023312 (2021)

2021
[31]

Takeuchi, Phys

H. Takeuchi, Phys. Rev. A 105, 013328 (2022)

2022
[32]

S. Huh, W. Yun, G. Yun, S. Hwang, K. Kwon, J. Hur, S. Lee, H. Takeuchi, S. K. Kim, and J. yoon Choi, (2024), arXiv:2408.11217

2024 arXiv
[33]

Nittmann, G

J. Nittmann, G. Daccord, and H. E. Stanley, Nature 314, 141 (1985)

1985
[34]

G. M. Homsy, Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 19, 217 (1987)

1987
[35]

C. J. Pethick and H. Smith, Bose–Einstein condensation in di- lute gases: Second edition (Cambridge university press, 2008)

2008
[36]

G. K. Batchelor, A. A. Townsend, and G. I. Taylor, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 193, 539 (1948)

1948
[37]

Comte-Bellot and S

G. Comte-Bellot and S. Corrsin, Journal of Fluid Mechanics25, 657 (1966)

1966
[38]

Kida, Phys

S. Kida, Phys. Fluids 24, 604 (1981)

1981
[39]

L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Fluid mechanics: Landau and Lifshitz: course of theoretical physics, Volume 6 , V ol. 6 (Else- vier, 1987)

1987
[40]

Morioka and R

S. Morioka and R. Ishii, Konso ryutai no rikigaku (Dynamics of multiphase fluids) (Asakura shoten, 1991) [in Japanese]

1991
[41]

Kawaguchi and M

Y . Kawaguchi and M. Ueda, Phys. Rep.520, 253 (2012)

2012
[42]

V ollhardt and P

D. V ollhardt and P. Wolfle, The superfluid phases of helium 3 (Dover, 2013)

2013
[43]

Tsubota, M

M. Tsubota, M. Kobayashi, and H. Takeuchi, Phys. Rep. 522, 191 (2013)

2013
[44]

(Supplemental Material) Details of the formulation of universal functions can be accessed online
[45]

Frisch, Turbulence: The legacy of A.N

U. Frisch, Turbulence: The legacy of A.N. Kolmogorov (Cam- bridge University Press, 1995)

1995
[46]

P. A. Davidson, Turbulence: An Introduction for Scientists and Engineers (Oxford University Press, 2004)

2004
[47]

S. Huh, K. Kim, K. Kwon, and J.-y. Choi, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033471 (2020)

2020
[48]

J. O. Indekeu, C.-Y . Lin, N. Van Thu, B. Van Schaeybroeck, and T. H. Phat, Phys. Rev. A91, 033615 (2015)

2015
[49]

(Supplemental Material) Details of the numerical simulations can be accessed online
[50]

(Supplemental Material) Details of the calculation of character- istic length can be accessed online
[51]

(Supplemental Material) Details of forming vortex sheets can be accessed online
[52]

Kida and S

S. Kida and S. Yanase, Ranryu rikigaku (Turbulent dynamics) (Asakura shoten, 1999) [in Japanese]

1999
[53]

Abramowitz and I

M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, eds., Handbook of Mathe- matical Functions with Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables, National Bureau of Standards Applied Mathematics Se- ries, V ol. 55 (U.S. Government Printing O ffice, Washington, D.C., 1964)

1964
[54]

(Supplemental Material) Details of determination of the fitting parameters can be accessed online
[55]

A. A. Townsend and G. I. Taylor, Proceedings of the Royal So- ciety of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 208, 534 (1951)

1951
[56]

Y . Geng, J. Tao, M. Zhao, S. Mukherjee, S. Eckel, G. K. Camp- bell, and I. B. Spielman, (2024), arXiv:2411.19807

2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [17]

S. Huh, K. Mukherjee, K. Kwon, J. Seo, J. Hur, S. I. Mistakidis, H. R. Sadeghpour, and J.-y. Choi, Nat. Phys.20, 402 (2024)

work page 2024

[2] [1]

A. J. Bray, Adv. Phys. 43, 357 (1994)

1994

[3] [2]

J. D. Gunton, R. Toral, and A. Chakrabarti, Physica Scripta 1990, 12 (1990)

work page 1990

[4] [3]

B. A. Camley and F. L. H. Brown, The Journal of Chemical Physics 135, 225106 (2011)

work page 2011

[5] [4]

J. K. Ho ffer and D. N. Sinha, Phys. Rev. A 33, 1918 (1986)

work page 1986

[6] [5]

Damle, S

K. Damle, S. N. Majumdar, and S. Sachdev, Phys. Rev. A 54, 5037 (1996)

work page 1996

[7] [6]

Takeuchi, K

H. Takeuchi, K. Kasamatsu, M. Tsubota, and M. Nitta, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 245301 (2012)

work page 2012

[8] [7]

Kudo and Y

K. Kudo and Y . Kawaguchi, Phys. Rev. A88, 013630 (2013)

work page 2013