Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 62 references

An alternative interpretation of the Grioli gyroscope suspension points

T0 review · 3 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 Two suspension lines make an asymmetric gyroscope precess

desk verdict A clean lab-frame re-derivation of Grioli's condition with a nice geometric reinterpretation, but Theorem 1's 'exhaust all' claim is under-proven and the paper needs revision before that part is trustworthy. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.19819 v3 pith:GBO6Y6MY submitted 2025-06-24 physics.class-ph math-phmath.MP

Alexei A. Deriglazov This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.class-phmath-phmath.MP MSC 70E1570E17
keywords regularprecessionasymmetricgyroscopeEuler–Poissonequationsrotationmatrixsuspensionpointsmomentsofinertiaspinquantizationanalogyheavyrigidbody
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

The paper claims that an asymmetric heavy top with a fixed point can undergo regular precession if and only if its suspension point lies on one of two straight lines through the center of mass, at angle $\cos^2\varphi_g = (B_g-A_g)/(C_g-A_g)$ to the smallest inertia axis. It derives the motion from the Euler–Poisson equations written in the laboratory frame and shows that rotation and precession share one frequency $\alpha$, with $\alpha^2 = f/\sqrt{(C-B)(B-A)+(A+C-B)^2}$, and that only two such motions exist, clockwise and counter-clockwise. The result matters because it turns an old no-go expectation for asymmetric bodies into an explicit preparation recipe, and because the frequency is rigidly fixed to two values—a classical analogue of spin quantization that the paper highlights.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the rotation-matrix factorization $R(t)=R_b(\alpha t)R_a(\alpha t)$ for a regular precession, inserted into the Euler–Poisson equations $J\dot{\Omega}=[J\Omega,\Omega]+f[R^T k, z(0)]$ with all vectors parameterized in the laboratory frame. Equating Fourier coefficients forces the rotation and precession axes to be orthogonal, forces the center-of-mass axis to coincide with the rotation axis, and forces one inertia axis to pass through the precession axis. The supporting engine is the inertia-shift formula $I'=I+h(\delta-zz^T)$ for moving the suspension point away from the center of mass; solving the condition $\cos^2\varphi=(B-A)/(C-A)$ inside this formula selects the two asymptote lines and shows the result is independent of the distance $L$.

What would settle it

Substitute a general direction $z=(\cos\varphi_g, z_B, \sin\varphi_g)$ into the inertia-shift formula and ask whether any nonzero $z_B$ solves the required condition $\cos^2\varphi=(B-A)/(C-A)$; finding one such point, or a numerical solution of the Euler–Poisson equations from such a point that exhibits a regular precession, would disprove the claimed exhaustiveness. Confirming that the equations admit no such solution would close the gap.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central assertion is Theorem 1: with principal moments at the center of mass ordered $A_g<B_g<C_g$, regular precession of an asymmetric gyroscope occurs exactly when the suspension point lies in the principal plane on one of the lines $x_C = \pm\sqrt{(C_g-B_g)/(B_g-A_g)}\,x_A$, equivalently $\cos^2\varphi_g=(B_g-A_g)/(C_g-A_g)$. For such a body the motion is $R(t)=R_b(\alpha t)R_a(\alpha t)$: at the initial instant the intermediate inertia axis lies along the space-fixed precession axis $b$, the gravity vector makes angle $\cos\theta=(A+C-B)/\sqrt{(C-B)(B-A)+(A+C-B)^2}$ with $b$, and the center-of-mass axis lies along the rotation vector $a$. Rotation and precession share the frequency $\alpha^2=f/\sqrt{(C-B)(B-A)+(A+C-B)^2}$, and the clockwise and counter-clockwise versions exhaust all regular precessions. The calculation identifies the two suspension lines as the asymptotes of a hyperbola marking where, as the suspension point moves away from the center of mass, the intermediate and largest moments of inertia exchange order—an interpretation distinct from the circular-section picture of the earlier literature.

Load-bearing premise

The classification assumes, without a complete derivation in the text, that the admissible suspension points all lie in the principal plane spanned by the smallest and largest inertia axes at the center of mass; a suspension point outside that plane satisfying the same angle condition would make the list of regular precessions incomplete.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A regular precession of an asymmetric gyroscope cannot have the center of mass precessing about the gravity vector.
  • The only allowed regular precession is orthogonal: rotation axis and precession axis are perpendicular, and their frequencies coincide.
  • For a given body, total mass and the distance from the suspension point to the center of mass change only the frequency, not the geometry of the precession.
  • The admissible suspension lines are the frontiers separating two orderings of the moments of inertia; choosing a suspension point on them is necessary and sufficient for regular precession.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the exhaustiveness claim holds, the two-valued frequency is a classical two-level observable: for a fixed body the angular frequency is determined by the moments and $f$ alone, independent of how the motion is started, and direct measurement or simulation could test it.
  • The paper leaves stability open; a linear stability analysis around the two exact solutions would show whether small perturbations keep the motion close to the regular precession.
  • The restriction to suspension points in the principal plane is the most direct point to probe: allowing a component along the intermediate axis in the inertia-shift formula either closes the gap or reveals additional suspension loci.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper re-derives the conditions for regular precession of a heavy asymmetric rigid body with a fixed point not at the center of mass, working entirely in the Laboratory frame with the rotation-matrix formalism. It establishes necessary conditions (Lemma 1): the rotation and precession axes must be orthogonal, the center-of-mass axis must coincide with the rotation axis, and one inertia axis must pass through the precession axis. In Section V the precession axis is identified with the intermediate axis of inertia at a particular instant, and the gravity-vector orientation and frequency are fixed in terms of the principal moments at the suspension point. Section VI analyzes how the principal moments and axes depend on the suspension point, and concludes that the admissible suspension points lie on the two straight lines x_C = ± sqrt((C_g-B_g)/(B_g-A_g)) x_A in the principal plane through the center of mass. These lines are the asymptotes of the hyperbola separating regions where the intermediate and largest moments interchange as the distance from the center of mass grows. The main theorem asserts that the two corresponding motions (a counter-clockwise and a clockwise regular precession) exhaust all possible regular precessions of an asymmetric gyroscope. The paper also draws an analogy between the rigidity of the precession frequency and the quantization of spin.

Significance. If the exhaustiveness claim is fully established, the paper gives a self-contained, coordinate-free-looking derivation of the Grioli suspension-point result, with an alternative geometric interpretation of the suspension lines as frontiers of moment-interchange regions. The forward direction (a suspension point on the stated lines yields a regular precession) is verified by direct substitution and the algebra in Sections IV and V is largely explicit; the final frequency formula is parameter-free and falsifiable. The main value of the paper lies in the alternative interpretation and in the detailed Laboratory-frame derivation. However, two load-bearing gaps in the proof of exhaustiveness—the omitted frequency-resonance case and the unproved restriction of suspension points to the principal plane—prevent the theorem from being fully established as written. These gaps appear fixable, but they require genuine additional analysis.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV, Eqs. (23)-(29), case analysis] The case analysis for the Fourier coefficients omits the frequency resonance beta = alpha/2. In that case gamma_minus = alpha - beta equals beta, so the coefficients at frequency beta and gamma_minus in Eq. (24) combine and the equations are not covered by the 'incomparable frequencies' case (if that phrase means pairwise distinct frequencies), nor by the beta = 2*alpha or beta = alpha cases. Since the proof of Lemma 1 depends on covering all possible frequency ratios, the necessity conditions are not fully established for beta = alpha/2. Please add this case and show that it also leads to a dynamically symmetric body (or, if it does not, the classification of regular precessions would need to be extended).
  2. [Section VI, Eq. (51) and footnote 5] The restriction of the suspension-point search to the principal plane at the center of mass, z = (z_A, 0, z_C), is asserted without proof. The cited relation (53), the parallel-axis theorem, does not by itself imply z_B = 0. For z_B ≠ 0 the tensor I' = I_G + h(1 - z z^T) is not block-diagonal in the G-frame; its intermediate eigenvector need not be e_B, and can be e_A when z lies in the B-C plane and h is sufficiently large. Lemma 1 only requires the center-of-mass axis at the new suspension point to be orthogonal to the intermediate eigenvector of I', and the angle condition (4) must then be imposed on the resulting principal axes. The paper does not prove that no z_B ≠ 0 can satisfy these conditions, so the classification (63)-(66) may be incomplete. This gap directly affects the exhaustiveness claim of Theorem 1.
  3. [Eq. (13)] The stated equality Omega^2(t) = (alpha + beta)^2 is inconsistent with Eq. (12) unless (a, b) = 1. From Eq. (12), Omega^2 = alpha^2 + beta^2 + 2 alpha beta (a, b), which is constant but not equal to (alpha + beta)^2 for non-collinear a and b. The proof of Theorem 2 in Section III uses only constancy of Omega^2, so the argument survives, but the equation as written is an internal inconsistency and should be corrected.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section IV, list of cases] The notation 'alpha != beta != 2*alpha != gamma_+ != gamma_-' is ambiguous; if pairwise distinctness is intended, this should be stated explicitly, and the resonance beta = alpha/2 (for which gamma_- = beta) must be added as a separate case (see major comment).
  2. [Eqs. (35)-(36)] The notation I(n-m) is used for In - Im but the convention is introduced only inline; defining it once in the Notation section or at first use would improve readability.
  3. [Section VII] The word 'quantized' is used metaphorically; the two allowed frequencies are continuous functions of the inertia moments and f, so the analogy with spin quantization should be phrased as an analogy rather than a literal quantization.
  4. [Figure 4] The caption does not state which panel corresponds to the counter-clockwise and which to the clockwise precession; adding this would make the figure self-contained.
  5. [Footnote 2] The statement 'A + C - B = 2 g^2, where g^2 is an element of the mass matrix' is cryptic and should be explained or removed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the gyroscope conditions are derived by direct substitution and algebraic solving; the only flagged issue is an omitted proof of the principal-plane restriction, which is a completeness gap rather than a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's central chain is self-contained. Section IV substitutes the regular-precession ansatz R(t)=R_b(βt)R_a(αt) into the Euler-Poisson equations and equates Fourier coefficients, obtaining Lemma 1 (orthogonality (a,b)=0, center-of-mass axis along a, and an inertia axis coinciding with b). Section V repeats the substitution in the inertia frame, yielding the algebraic system (38) and then the unique geometric data (44)-(46) and (48)-(50), with the frequency (6) from (39). No parameter is fitted from the target suspension-point condition. Section VI then enforces the previously derived angle condition (4) on the exact shifted-inertia expressions (53)-(54); solving (63)-(65) gives z_A^2=(B_g-A_g)/(C_g-A_g), which is a constraint-satisfaction calculation, not a tautology. The reliance on the author's own monograph [4] and papers [34,37] is for background formalism and known topology of the Euler-Poisson equations; the theorem's content does not reduce to those citations. The only genuine weakness is the footnote to Eq. (51): 'From the relation (53) it follows that the suspension points with the desired properties should lie in the principal plane of the axes of inertia calculated in the point G.' This is asserted without proof, and if a z_B≠0 solution of Eq. (4) existed the exhaustiveness claim of Theorem 1 would be incomplete. That is an omitted-proof/completeness gap, not a circular step, because no equation in the paper makes the lines (66) true by construction.

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

No free parameters are fitted; A, B, C, A_g, B_g, C_g, g, L, μ are physical inputs. The derivation assumes standard Euler-Poisson equations, the regular-precession product form, and asymmetric ordering of moments. The principal-plane restriction z_B = 0 is an unproven narrowing of the search space, and the Section IV frequency case list implicitly omits β = α/2. No new entities are introduced.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Euler-Poisson equations (19)-(20) with the parallel-axis inertia tensor describe the heavy gyroscope.
    Used throughout as the equations of motion; standard classical mechanics for a rigid body with a fixed point.
  • domain assumption Regular precession is represented by R(t) = R_b(βt) R_a(αt) with constant α, β and non-collinear axes.
    This is the definition and ansatz of the motion class; later constraints are derived, but the analysis starts from this product form.
  • domain assumption Principal moments at G and O satisfy A_g < B_g < C_g and A < B < C.
    The paper considers dynamically asymmetric bodies and later identifies the ordering consistent with solutions.
  • ad hoc to paper Suspension-point shifts are studied only with z = (z_A, 0, z_C) in the A-C principal plane at G.
    The paper asserts from Eq. (53) that this restriction follows, but no explicit proof is provided that z_B = 0 is necessary.
  • ad hoc to paper The frequency-resonance case β = α/2 is implicitly assumed not to arise.
    The case analysis in Section IV lists only incomparable frequencies, β = 2α, and β = α; this resonance is absent, and the exhaustive theorem relies on it.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of An alternative interpretation of the Grioli gyroscope suspension points." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GBO6Y6MY

@misc{pith2026250619819,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: An alternative interpretation of the Grioli gyroscope suspension points},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GBO6Y6MY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.19819}
}
read the original abstract

We present a detailed analysis of all possible regular precessions of a heavy asymmetric body with a fixed point not coinciding with the center of mass. The calculations are done in terms of the rotation matrix, by writing the Euler-Poisson equations with all involved vectors parameterized in the Laboratory frame. It is shown that a regular precession is possible if the suspension point is chosen on the straight lines (lying in the principal plane) which are frontiers of the regions where, as the distance from the center of mass increases, the interchange of the intermediate and largest moments of inertia occurs. Like the spin of an electron in quantum mechanics, the frequency of regular precession in classical mechanics turns out to be rigidly fixed by two values, i.e., quantized.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.19819 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: The unique initial position of an asymmetric gyroscope that can experience a regular precession. The axes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Laboraty basis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Configuration of the gyroscope at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Two possible regular precessions of an asymmetric gyroscope. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: For suspension points lying on the hyperbola, an asymmetric gyroscope becomes dynamically symmetric. For suspension [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: (a) - The dependence of inertia moments on the distance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: (a) - The dependence of inertia moments on the distance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    For the case of an asymmetric gyroscope, its center of mass cannot precess about the gravity vector

    work page

  2. [2]

    In our theorem, this instant was chosen as the initial one

    During a regular precession, the intermediate inertia axis at some instant will necessarily coincide with the precession vector b. In our theorem, this instant was chosen as the initial one. At this instant, the position of the body (that is, the directions of inertia and center of mass axes) in the gravitational field is fixed in a unique way as describe...

    work page

  3. [3]

    The only possible regular precession is the orthogonal regular precession: ( a, b) = 0

    work page

  4. [4]

    Regular precession is only possible with coinciding frequencies of rotation and precession

    work page

  5. [5]

    Total mass µ and the distance L to the center of mass affect only the frequency (6). The direction of the unit vector to the center of mass, lying on the axis of rotation, does not affect precession: for a gyroscope with an initial position in which z(0) = +a or z(0) =−a, the rotation matrix turns out to be the same. In the remainder of this article, we c...

    work page

  6. [6]

    Leimanis, The general problem of the motion of coupled rigid bodies about a fixed point , (Springer-Verlag, 1965); (see p

    E. Leimanis, The general problem of the motion of coupled rigid bodies about a fixed point , (Springer-Verlag, 1965); (see p. 108-115)

    work page 1965

  7. [7]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Mechanics, Volume 1, third edition, (Elsevier, 1976)

    work page 1976

  8. [8]

    H. M. Yehia, Rigid body dynamics. A Lagrangian approach , Advances in Mechanics and Mathematics, V. 45, Birkh¨ auser, 2022

    work page 2022

Show all 62 references
  1. [9]

    Deriglazov, Rigid body as a constrained system: Lagrangian and Hamiltonian formalism , (Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2024), ISBN: 978-1-0364-1287-6

    Alexei A. Deriglazov, Rigid body as a constrained system: Lagrangian and Hamiltonian formalism , (Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2024), ISBN: 978-1-0364-1287-6

    2024

  2. [10]

    X. Pang, Q. Jiang, Y. Xiangc, Gao-Ming Deng, The precession of particle spin in spherical symmetric spacetimes , Eur. Phys. J. C (2025) 85:19

    2025

  3. [11]

    S. Murk, D. R. Terno, R. Vadapalli, Gravity-induced birefringence in spherically symmetric spacetimes , Phys. Rev. D 111 (2025) 4, 044001

    2025

  4. [12]

    S. V. Ershkov, Revisiting Euler-Poisson equations for a rigid body under the influence of time-dependent temperature field , J. Appl. Comput. Mech., 11 (2) (2025) 519-528

    2025

  5. [13]

    Wei-Si Qiu, Dan-Dan Lian, Peng-Ming Zhang, Gravitational orbital Hall effect of vortex light in Lense-Thirring metric , Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (2024) 10, 1013

    2024

  6. [14]

    Soon-Tae Hong, Rough estimates of solar system gravitomagnetic effects in post-Newtonian gravity , Universe 11 (2025) 3, 90

    2025

  7. [15]

    Rakhimova, F

    G. Rakhimova, F. Abdulkhamidov, F. Atamurotov, G. Mustafa, Spinning particle motion around charged black hole from T-duality, Chin. J. Phys. 94 (2025) 66-78

    2025

  8. [16]

    Dan-Dan Lian, Wei-Si Qiu, Peng-Ming Zhang, Gravitational spin Hall effect of electrons in Schwarzschild metric , arXiv:2408.09396

    arXiv

  9. [17]

    Oteev, F

    T. Oteev, F. Abdulkhamidov, J. Rayimbaev, Z. Stuchlik, B. Ahmedov, Circular motion and collisions of spinning test particles around Kerr-Kiselev black holes , Phys. Dark Univ. 46 (2024) 101588

    2024

  10. [18]

    Davlataliev, J

    A. Davlataliev, J. Rayimbaev, F. Abdulkhamidov, Z. Stuchlik, A. Abdujabbarov, Circular motion and collisions of charged spinning particles near Kerr Newman black holes , Phys. Dark Univ. 46 (2024) 101590

    2024

  11. [19]

    A. M. Grant, Flux-balance laws for spinning bodies under the gravitational self-force , Phys. Rev. D 111 (2025) 084015

    2025

  12. [20]

    Yongbin Du, Yunlong Liu, Xiangdong Zhang, Spinning Particle Dynamics and ISCO in Covariant Loop Quantum Gravity , JCAP 05 (2025) 045

    2025

  13. [21]

    Mustafa, Emre Demir, Faisal Javed, S.K

    G. Mustafa, Emre Demir, Faisal Javed, S.K. Maurya, Ertan Gudekli, Epicyclic oscillations and particle collision with trajectories around quantum corrected black holes Phys. Dark Univ. 46 (2024) 101708

    2024

  14. [22]

    Qin Tan, Weike Deng, Sheng Long, Jiliang Jing, Motion of spinning particles around black hole in a dark matter halo , JCAP 05 (2025) 044

    2025

  15. [23]

    Gamboa, F

    J. Gamboa, F. Mendez, Resonance of Gravitational Axions-like Particles , Universe 10 (2024) 12, 463

    2024

  16. [24]

    Bhandari, S

    G. Bhandari, S. D. Pathak, Stark Energy Shifts due to Quantum Gravity in RGUP Algebra , arXiv:2505.12985

    arXiv

  17. [25]

    Bhandari, S

    G. Bhandari, S. D. Pathak, V. K. Ojha, RGUP Corrections to Scalar and Fermionic Fields , arXiv:2504.16043

    arXiv

  18. [26]

    Senjaya, Chronology Protection Conjecture in the Kerr-Newman black hole spacetime , Annals Phys

    D. Senjaya, Chronology Protection Conjecture in the Kerr-Newman black hole spacetime , Annals Phys. 479 (2025) 170051

    2025

  19. [27]

    Dimakis, Time operator from parametrization invariance and implications for cosmology , Phys

    N. Dimakis, Time operator from parametrization invariance and implications for cosmology , Phys. Rev. D 111 (2025) 8, 083536

    2025

  20. [28]

    Senjaya, T

    D. Senjaya, T. Bunyaratavej, P. Burikham, Scalar Instabilities Inside The Extremal Dyonic Kerr-Sen Black Hole: Novel Exact Solutions and Chronology Protection Conjecture , Eur.Phys.J.C 85 (2025) 6, 654

    2025

  21. [29]

    Senjaya, Relativistic scalar fields canonical quantization in Einstein-Yang-Mills-Higgs’s rotating black hole space-time , Eur

    D. Senjaya, Relativistic scalar fields canonical quantization in Einstein-Yang-Mills-Higgs’s rotating black hole space-time , Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (2024) 7, 747

    2024

  22. [30]

    Carlos Barcelo, Gil Jannes, The harmonic background paradigm, or why gravity is attractive , Gen. Rel. Grav. 56 (2024) 10, 116

    2024

  23. [31]

    Ramond, S

    P. Ramond, S. Isoyama Symplectic mechanics of relativistic spinning compact bodies II.: Canonical formalism in the Schwarzschild spacetime, Phys. Rev. D 111 (2025) 6, 064027

    2025

  24. [32]

    E. J. Routh, The elementary part of a treatise on the dynamics of a system of rigid bodies, being part I of a treatise on the whole subject, Sixth edition. (London and New York: The Macmillan Co. 1897). Reprinted by Dover Publications, New York, 1955; (see Art. 214c)

    1955

  25. [33]

    Grioli, Esistenza e determinazione delle precessioni regolari dinamicamente possibili per un solido pesante asimmetrico , 17 Ann

    G. Grioli, Esistenza e determinazione delle precessioni regolari dinamicamente possibili per un solido pesante asimmetrico , 17 Ann. Mat. Pura Appl., Ser.4, vol. 26 N 3-4 (1947) 271-281

    1947

  26. [34]

    M. P. Gulyaev, On a new particular solution of the equations of motion of a heavy rigid body having one fixed point , Vestnik Moskov. Univ., Ser. Fiz. Mat. i Estestv. Nauk , vyp. 2 (1955) 5-21

    1955

  27. [35]

    H. M. Yehia, Regular precession of a rigid body (gyrostat) acted upon by an irreducible combination of three classical fields , J. Egypt. Math. Soc. 25 (2) (2017) 216-219

    2017

  28. [36]

    G. V. Gorr, On a class of precessions of a rigid body with a fixed point under the action of forces of three homogeneous force fields, Russian Journal of Nonlinear Dynamics, 2023, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 249-264

    2023

  29. [37]

    V. Yu. Olshanskii, Regular precession of a rigid body in two uniform fields , Mechanics Research Communications, 127 (2023) 104041

    2023

  30. [38]

    A. P. Markeev, On the stability of the regular Grioli precession in a particular case , Mechanics of Solids, Vol 53, pages 1-14, (2018)

    2018

  31. [39]

    Deriglazov, Lagrangian and Hamiltonian formulations of asymmetric rigid body, considered as a constrained system, Eur

    Alexei A. Deriglazov, Lagrangian and Hamiltonian formulations of asymmetric rigid body, considered as a constrained system, Eur. J. Phys. 44, 065001 (2023); arXiv:2301.10741

    2023 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Deriglazov, Poincar´ e-Chetaev equations in the Dirac’s formalism of constrained systems , Particles (2023) 6, 913-922; arXiv:2302.12423

    Alexei A. Deriglazov, Poincar´ e-Chetaev equations in the Dirac’s formalism of constrained systems , Particles (2023) 6, 913-922; arXiv:2302.12423

    2023 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Deriglazov, Comment on the Letter ”Geometric Origin of the Tennis Racket Effect” by P

    Alexei A. Deriglazov, Comment on the Letter ”Geometric Origin of the Tennis Racket Effect” by P. Mardesic, et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 064301 (2020) ; arXiv:2302.04190

    2020 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Deriglazov, An asymmetrical body: example of analytical solution for the rotation matrix in elementary functions and Dzhanibekov effect, Commun

    Alexei A. Deriglazov, An asymmetrical body: example of analytical solution for the rotation matrix in elementary functions and Dzhanibekov effect, Commun. Nonlinear. Sci. Numer. Simulat. 138 (2024) 108257; arXiv:2401.11518

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Deriglazov, Lagrange top: integrability according to Liouville and examples of analytic solutions , Particles (2024) 7, 543-559; arXiv:2306.02394

    Alexei A. Deriglazov, Lagrange top: integrability according to Liouville and examples of analytic solutions , Particles (2024) 7, 543-559; arXiv:2306.02394

    2024 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Deriglazov, Has the problem of the motion of a heavy symmetric top been solved in quadratures? , Foundations of Physics (2024) 54:41; arXiv:2304.10371

    Alexei A. Deriglazov, Has the problem of the motion of a heavy symmetric top been solved in quadratures? , Foundations of Physics (2024) 54:41; arXiv:2304.10371

    2024 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Alexei A. Deriglazov, Euler-Poisson equations of a dancing spinning top, integrability and examples of analytical solutions , Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, 127 (2023) 107579; arXiv:2307.12201

    2023 arXiv

  38. [46]

    J. Foo, C. Bellamy, T. C. Ralph, General relativistic particle trajectories via quantum mechanical weak values and the Schwarzschild-Alcubierre spacetime, Phys. Rev. A 111 (2025) 5, 052201

    2025

  39. [47]

    Kei-ichiro Kubota, S. Arai, H. Motohashi, S. Mukohyama, Spin wave optics for gravitational waves lensed by a Kerr black hole, Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 12, 124011

    2024

  40. [48]

    Hammad, R

    F. Hammad, R. Saadati, M. Simard, S. Novoa-Cattivelli, Dynamics of charged spin-1/2 particles in superposed states minimally coupled to electromagnetism in curved spacetime within the WKB approximation , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 12, 125012

    2024

  41. [49]

    Wei-Si Qiu, Dan-Dan Lian, Peng-Ming Zhang, Effective ray equations for vortex light and their application in an optical waveguide, arXiv:2409.13243

    arXiv

  42. [50]

    Andrzejewski, Revisiting the dynamics of a charged spinning body in curved spacetime , Class

    K. Andrzejewski, Revisiting the dynamics of a charged spinning body in curved spacetime , Class. Quant. Grav. 42 (2025) 5, 055019

    2025

  43. [51]

    Saadati, F

    R. Saadati, F. Hammad, S. Novoa-Cattivelli, M. Simard, N. Fleury, Spin precession and neutrino helicity flip in various spacetimes, Phys. Rev. D 111 (2025) 6, 065012

    2025

  44. [52]

    Abdelhamid Albaid, Relativistic Correction to the Magnetic Moment of the Charged Lepton , arXiv:2501.07610

  45. [53]

    Kostas Filippas, Nested Holography, Phys. Rev. D 111 (2025) 8, 086018

    2025

  46. [54]

    Bhandari, S

    G. Bhandari, S. D. Pathak, M. Sharma, Generalized Uncertainty Principle and the Zeeman Effect: Relativistic Corrections Unveiled, Nucl. Phys. B 1012 (2025) 116817

    2025

  47. [55]

    R. R. S. Oliveira, Dirac fermions in a spinning conical Godel-type spacetime , Class. Quantum Grav. 41 (2024) 175017

    2024

  48. [56]

    Anwesha Chakraborty, Emergent geometric phase in time-dependent noncommutative quantum system , PoS CORFU2022 436 (2023) 342

    2023

  49. [57]

    Efthimiades, Derivation of the Schrodinger equation from QED , Eur

    S. Efthimiades, Derivation of the Schrodinger equation from QED , Eur. J. Phys. 45 (2024) 3, 035401

    2024

  50. [58]

    Bagchi, A

    B. Bagchi, A. Ghosh, M. Znojil, A reappraisal of Lagrangians with non-quadratic velocity dependence and branched Hamil- tonians, Symmetry 16, 860 (2024)

    2024

  51. [59]

    S. A. Rashkovskiy, Classical harmonic oscillator with quantum energy spectrum , arXiv:1105.5339

    arXiv

  52. [60]

    S. A. Rashkovskiy, Quantum like behavior of nonlinear classical oscillator , arXiv:1212.3072

    arXiv

  53. [61]

    Deriglazov, Nonminimal spin-field interaction of the classical electron and quantization of spin , Physics of Particles and Nuclei Letters, 2020, Vol.17, No 5, p

    Alexei A. Deriglazov, Nonminimal spin-field interaction of the classical electron and quantization of spin , Physics of Particles and Nuclei Letters, 2020, Vol.17, No 5, p. 738-743; arXiv:2001.01294

    2020 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Deriglazov, Rotation matrix of a charged symmetrical body: one-parameter family of solutions in elementary functions, Universe (2024) 10, 250; arXiv:2403.12089

    Alexei A. Deriglazov, Rotation matrix of a charged symmetrical body: one-parameter family of solutions in elementary functions, Universe (2024) 10, 250; arXiv:2403.12089

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

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