Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 53 references

Magnetic Field Walls in Flat-band Superconductors

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-07-14 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Flat-band superconductors can host walls of magnetic flux that stay superconducting and survive large applied fields.

desk verdict Clean analytic prediction of flux walls from a periodic free-energy model; the math holds and the main caveats are already stated by the authors. read the letter →

arxiv 2606.06791 v3 pith:HTLQC6QO submitted 2026-06-05 cond-mat.supr-con

Guodong Jiang , Aaron Dunbrack , Tero T. Heikkilä , Päivi Törmä This is my paper
classification cond-mat.supr-con PACS 74.25.Ha74.20.De74.25.Op
keywords flat-bandsuperconductivitymagneticfieldwallskinksolitonbreathersine-Gordonequationlowercriticalquantumgeometryvector-potentialfreeenergy
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 argues that when electrons live in a flat band, the energy cost of forming a superconducting condensate no longer depends on the condensate’s momentum. That makes the superconducting free-energy density a negative, periodic function of the magnetic vector potential. Maxwell’s equations then admit two families of soliton solutions—kinks and breathers—that concentrate magnetic flux into planar walls while the material remains superconducting everywhere. The kink sets a lower critical field; the denser breather solutions allow the field to penetrate almost uniformly without ever driving the free energy positive, so there is no upper critical field within the model. The result offers a concrete mechanism by which flat-band materials can keep a superconducting gap open under large magnetic fields, something ordinary dispersive-band superconductors cannot do.

What carries the argument

The lattice-periodic cosine free-energy model fs(Ay) = −δ1 − δ2 cos(2eaAy/ℏ), which reduces Maxwell’s equations to the time-independent sine-Gordon equation and thereby generates the kink and breather soliton solutions that constitute the walls.

What would settle it

Measure the lower critical field and the field dependence of diamagnetic susceptibility in a confirmed flat-band superconductor; if walls form, Hc1 should scale as 1/λL rather than 1/λL^{2} and diamagnetism should collapse while the gap remains open.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In a flat band the superconducting free-energy density remains negative for every vector potential along a high-symmetry crystal direction. Consequently Maxwell’s equations support stable kink and breather soliton solutions that form walls of magnetic flux inside an otherwise fully superconducting bulk; these walls set the lower critical field and, within the cosine model, eliminate any upper critical field.

Load-bearing premise

The free energy at every point is assumed to depend only on the local vector potential, which is valid only when the superconducting coherence length is much shorter than the magnetic penetration depth.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript predicts a magnetic-field wall phase in flat-band superconductors. Because flat bands lack a single-particle kinetic-energy penalty for finite-momentum condensates, the superconducting free-energy density fs(A) remains negative and lattice-periodic in the vector potential along high-symmetry directions at low temperature. A minimal cosine model, fs(Ay)=-δ1-δ2 cos(2ea/ℏ Ay), is introduced; Maxwell’s equations then reduce to the time-independent sine-Gordon equation whose kink (Eq. 7) and breather (Eq. 10) soliton solutions describe isolated and dense walls of magnetic flux, respectively. The kink energy yields a lower critical field Hc1,w=(2/π)ℏ/(µ0 ea λ L); within the same model the free-energy difference of the optimal breather never reaches zero, implying the absence of an upper critical field. Competition with vortices is analyzed by comparing lower critical fields and total flux absorption, and the local self-consistency approximation fs(r)≈fs(A(r)) is stated to require ξ≪λ L.

Significance. If the global negativity of fs(A) is realized in real materials, the work supplies a concrete, band-geometry-based mechanism by which superconductivity can coexist with large magnetic fields without forming normal cores. The analytic reduction to the sine-Gordon equation, the closed-form expressions for Hc1,w and the breather period, and the explicit microscopic support from mean-field calculations on the Lieb and flattened BHZ lattices (Suppl. Secs. II–III) constitute falsifiable predictions that can be tested by magnetization or local-probe experiments on flat-band platforms. The result therefore broadens the classification of superconducting magnetic responses beyond the conventional type-I/II dichotomy and is of clear interest to the condensed-matter community working on moiré and other flat-band systems.

major comments (2)
  1. Methods I and Suppl. Sec. I make the local self-consistency approximation fs(r)≈fs(A(r)) explicit and state that it requires ξ≪λ L. While the paper correctly notes that flat-band superconductors typically have small ξ (often lattice-scale), the high-field breather regime eventually compresses the wall spacing to the lattice constant (text after Eq. 15). At that point gradient corrections of order ξ become non-negligible and could restore a finite upper critical field. A quantitative estimate of the size of these corrections, or an explicit statement that the no-Hc2 claim is restricted to the continuum cosine model, is needed before the high-field conclusion can be regarded as robust.
  2. Methods VI and Fig. 6 compare Hc1,w and Hc1,v by generalizing the cosine model to circular geometry and treating the vortex core as fully normal. The resulting expression (Eq. M49) depends sensitively on the free parameters r0 and δ1/δ2. Because both parameters are only loosely constrained by microscopic calculations, the claim that walls “almost always win” when Hc1,v≈Hc1,w remains qualitative. A more systematic mapping of the (r0,δ1/δ2,λ L) space, or a microscopic evaluation of the core energy for at least one lattice model, would strengthen the competition analysis.
minor comments (4)
  1. Fig. 1(c) and the accompanying caption would benefit from an explicit scale bar relating wall thickness to λ L, so that the exponential decay of Bz and jy is immediately visible.
  2. The notation for the soliton charge (±) is introduced in Eq. 7 but never used again; a brief remark that the two charges are degenerate under H o-H would avoid confusion.
  3. In Suppl. Sec. III the interaction strengths (U=0.04t for Lieb, UA=0.055t, UB=0.035t for BHZ) are stated without a clear criterion for their choice; a sentence relating them to the gap-to-bandwidth ratio would help the reader assess the strong-coupling regime.
  4. Typographical inconsistency: “Methods I” versus “Suppl. Sec. I”; a uniform labeling convention would improve navigation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: walls and critical fields are derived from a postulated periodic free-energy model whose negativity is independently motivated by microscopic flat-band arguments, not fitted to or defined by the wall solutions themselves.

full rationale

The central prediction (stable magnetic-flux walls as kink/breather solitons of Maxwell’s equations) follows from the lattice-periodic cosine free-energy density fs(Ay) = −δ1 − δ2 cos(2ea/ℏ Ay) inserted into j = −∇A fs and the continuum Maxwell equations, which reduce to the time-independent sine-Gordon equation whose known soliton solutions are then analyzed thermodynamically. The cosine form is an explicit minimal ansatz chosen to capture negativity plus TRIM periodicity; it is not fitted to any wall observable, nor is the wall phase used to define the free-energy functional. Microscopic support for global negativity of fs(A) is supplied independently in Suppl. Secs. II–III via mean-field gap equations and free-energy evaluations on concrete multi-orbital flat-band models (Lieb, flattened BHZ), which show that order parameters remain finite and Fs(A) < 0 for all A at low T and half-filling. Self-citations to prior geometric-superconductivity results concern superfluid weight and pairing form factors, not the wall solutions; they supply external microscopic motivation rather than a load-bearing uniqueness claim that forces the walls. The lower-critical-field formula Hc1,w = (2/π) ħ/(µ0 e a λL) is obtained by direct equating of free-energy functionals of the kink and zero-field states, and the absence of an upper critical field is a direct consequence of the average free-energy density −δ1 remaining negative for all breather periods—neither quantity is inserted by construction. The local-self-consistency approximation fs(r) ≈ fs(A(r)) is an explicit modeling assumption (Methods I) whose validity regime (ξ ≪ λL) is stated and is typical for flat-band superconductors; it does not render the soliton construction tautological. No step reduces a claimed prediction to a fitted input or to a self-citation of the target result itself.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The claim rests on a minimal free-energy model whose parameters are not fitted to wall data, on the standard Maxwell equations, and on the local-self-consistency approximation standard in London theory. No new particles or forces are introduced; the “wall phase” is a derived solution, not an independent entity.

free parameters (2)
  • δ1, δ2 (average and oscillation amplitude of condensation energy density)
    Chosen by hand to set the depth and amplitude of the cosine free-energy model; only their ratio and the derived penetration depth enter observable quantities.
  • core radius r0 of a vortex
    Treated as a free parameter ≳ a when comparing Hc1,v with Hc1,w; not fixed by the cosine model itself.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Local self-consistency: fs(r) ≈ fs(A(r)) when ξ ≪ λL
    Invoked in Methods I and throughout the continuum treatment; standard in London theory but load-bearing for the pure soliton solutions.
  • domain assumption fs(A) is globally negative and periodic with the Cooper-pair Brillouin zone at low T
    Justified by mean-field arguments and lattice examples (Suppl. Secs. II–III); if false, the walls are unstable.
  • ad hoc to paper Cosine model fs(Ay) = −δ1 − δ2 cos(2ea/ℏ Ay) captures the essential periodicity and negativity
    Minimal ansatz introduced after Eq. (5); higher harmonics are claimed to change results only quantitatively.
  • standard math Maxwell equations in the continuum London limit
    Eqs. (1)–(2); standard electrodynamics.
invented entities (1)
  • Magnetic field wall phase (kink and breather solitons of vector potential)
    purpose: To describe a new flux texture that absorbs magnetic field while remaining fully superconducting
    Derived solution of the sine-Gordon equation under the cosine free-energy model; not postulated independently of the equations.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Magnetic Field Walls in Flat-band Superconductors." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HTLQC6QO

@misc{pith2026260606791,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Magnetic Field Walls in Flat-band Superconductors},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HTLQC6QO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.06791}
}
read the original abstract

Superconductors of different types have distinct magnetic properties; for example, they can form Abrikosov vortices or alternating normal-superconducting domains. We predict that, in flat bands, a superconducting phase exhibiting walls of magnetic flux is stable in an applied magnetic field. This phase relies on the lack of a single particle energy penalty for forming condensates of any momentum in flat bands and, consequently, their superconducting free energy being a negative and periodic function of the vector potential at low temperatures. Using a minimal lattice-periodic model of free energy, we study two types of soliton modes of the wall phase: the kink and breather solitons. They determine the lower critical field and the high-field behavior of the wall phase, respectively. The competition between the walls and vortices in flat bands is also discussed. Our results suggest that flat bands help sustain superconductivity in the presence of large magnetic fields.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.06791 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Plots of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. (a) Log-linear plot of the free energy density difference be [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Plots of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a) Different possible directions of walls in the real space (represented by blue ribbons) with transverse arrows. (b) The arrow associated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Comparison of the lower critical fields between the wall and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references

  1. [1]

    A. M. Campbell and J. E. Evetts, Flux vortices and transport currents in type II superconductors, Advances in Physics21, 199 (1972)

    1972

  2. [2]

    Blatter, M

    G. Blatter, M. V. Feigel’man, V. B. Geshkenbein, A. I. Larkin, and V. M. Vinokur, Vortices in high-temperature superconduc- tors, Rev. Mod. Phys.66, 1125 (1994)

    1994

  3. [3]

    A. A. Abrikosov, Nobel lecture: Type-II superconductors and the vortex lattice, Rev. Mod. Phys.76, 975 (2004)

    2004

  4. [4]

    Babaev and M

    E. Babaev and M. Speight, Semi-Meissner state and neither type-I nor type-II superconductivity in multicomponent super- conductors, Phys. Rev. B72, 180502 (2005)

    2005

  5. [5]

    Moshchalkov, M

    V. Moshchalkov, M. Menghini, T. Nishio, Q. H. Chen, A. V. Silhanek, V. H. Dao, L. F. Chibotaru, N. D. Zhigadlo, and J. Karpinski, Type-1.5 superconductivity, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 117001 (2009). 6

    2009

  6. [6]

    D. F. Agterberg, E. Babaev, and J. Garaud, Microscopic predic- tion of skyrmion lattice state in clean interface superconductors, Phys. Rev. B90, 064509 (2014)

    2014

  7. [7]

    Bistritzer and A

    R. Bistritzer and A. H. MacDonald, Moir ´e bands in twisted double-layer graphene, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences108, 12233 (2011)

    2011

  8. [8]

    Y. Cao, V. Fatemi, S. Fang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxi- ras, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Unconventional superconductivity in magic-angle graphene superlattices, Nature556, 43 (2018)

    2018

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    Y. Cao, V. Fatemi, A. Demir, S. Fang, S. L. Tomarken, J. Y. Luo, J. D. Sanchez-Yamagishi, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxi- ras, R. C. Ashoori, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Correlated insulator behaviour at half-filling in magic-angle graphene superlattices, Nature556, 80 (2018)

    2018

  2. [10]

    E. Y. Andrei, D. K. Efetov, P. Jarillo-Herrero, A. H. MacDonald, K. F. Mak, T. Senthil, E. Tutuc, A. Yazdani, and A. F. Young, The marvels of moir ´e materials, Nature Reviews Materials6, 201 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    Balents, C

    L. Balents, C. R. Dean, D. K. Efetov, and A. F. Young, Super- conductivity and strong correlations in moir´e flat bands, Nature Physics16, 725 (2020)

    2020

  4. [12]

    D. M. Kennes, M. Claassen, L. Xian, A. Georges, A. J. Mil- lis, J. Hone, C. R. Dean, D. N. Basov, A. N. Pasupathy, and A. Rubio, Moir´e heterostructures as a condensed-matter quan- tum simulator, Nature Physics17, 155 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    T¨orm¨a, S

    P. T¨orm¨a, S. Peotta, and B. A. Bernevig, Superconductivity, su- perfluidity and quantum geometry in twisted multilayer systems, Nature Reviews Physics4, 528 (2022)

    2022

  6. [14]

    Provost and G

    J. Provost and G. Vallee, Riemannian structure on manifolds of quantum states, Communications in Mathematical Physics76, 289 (1980)

    1980

  7. [15]

    Resta, The insulating state of matter: a geometrical theory, The European Physical Journal B79, 121 (2011)

    R. Resta, The insulating state of matter: a geometrical theory, The European Physical Journal B79, 121 (2011)

    2011

  8. [16]

    Peotta and P

    S. Peotta and P. T¨orm¨a, Superfluidity in topologically nontrivial flat bands, Nature Communications6, 8944 (2015)

    2015

  9. [17]

    Liang, T

    L. Liang, T. I. Vanhala, S. Peotta, T. Siro, A. Harju, and P. T ¨orm¨a, Band geometry, Berry curvature, and superfluid weight, Phys. Rev. B95, 024515 (2017)

    2017

  10. [18]

    J. Yu, B. A. Bernevig, R. Queiroz, E. Rossi, P. T¨orm¨a, and B.-J. Yang, Quantum geometry in quantum materials, npj Quantum Materials10, 101 (2025)

    2025

  11. [19]

    Jiang and Y

    G. Jiang and Y. Barlas, Pair density waves from local band ge- ometry, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 016002 (2023)

    2023

  12. [20]

    Chen and W

    W. Chen and W. Huang, Pair density wave facilitated by Bloch quantum geometry in nearly flat band multiorbital supercon- ductors, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy66, 287212 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    Quantum geometric nesting

    Z. Han, J. Herzog-Arbeitman, B. A. Bernevig, and S. A. Kivel- son, “Quantum geometric nesting” and solvable model flat-band systems, Phys. Rev. X14, 041004 (2024)

    2024

  14. [22]

    Sun, R.-P

    Z.-T. Sun, R.-P. Yu, S. A. Chen, J.-X. Hu, and K. T. Law, Flat- band Fulde-Ferrell-Larkin-Ovchinnikov state from quantum ge- ometric discrepancy, Quantum Frontiers4, 20 (2025)

    2025

  15. [23]

    Wang and W

    H.-X. Wang and W. Huang, Density matrix renormalization group study of the quantum-geometry-facilitated pair density wave order, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy 68, 297211 (2025)

    2025

  16. [24]

    E. O. Lamponen, S. K. P ¨ontys, and P. T¨orm¨a, Superconductiv- ity and pair density waves from nearest-neighbor interactions in frustrated lattice geometries, Phys. Rev. B112, 144514 (2025)

    2025

  17. [25]

    Zhang, W

    J.-X. Zhang, W. O. Wang, L. Balents, and L. Savary, Identifying instabilities with quantum geometry in flat-band systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 176504 (2026)

    2026

  18. [26]

    Dunbrack, P

    A. Dunbrack, P. Virtanen, and T. T. Heikkil ¨a, Quantum- geometric helical superconductivity, Phys. Rev. B113, 174525 (2026)

    2026

  19. [27]

    S. V. Kuplevakhsky and A. M. Glukhov, Static solitons of the sine-Gordon equation and equilibrium vortex structure in Josephson junctions, Phys. Rev. B73, 024513 (2006)

    2006

  20. [28]

    T. A. Fulton, R. C. Dynes, and P. W. Anderson, The flux shuttle—a Josephson junction shift register employing single flux quanta, Proceedings of the IEEE61, 28 (1973)

    1973

  21. [29]

    Y. S. Gal’Pern and A. Filippov, Soliton bound states in long Josephson junctions, JETP Lett.(Engl. Transl.);(United States) 35(1982)

    1982

  22. [30]

    Tanaka, Soliton in two-band superconductor, Phys

    Y. Tanaka, Soliton in two-band superconductor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 017002 (2001)

    2001

  23. [31]

    Gurevich and V

    A. Gurevich and V. M. Vinokur, Interband phase modes and nonequilibrium soliton structures in two-gap superconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett.90, 047004 (2003)

    2003

  24. [32]

    S. V. Kuplevakhsky, A. N. Omelyanchouk, and Y. S. Yerin, Soli- ton states in mesoscopic two-band-superconducting cylinders, Low Temperature Physics37, 667 (2011)

    2011

  25. [33]

    Garaud, J

    J. Garaud, J. Carlstr ¨om, and E. Babaev, Topological solitons in three-band superconductors with broken time reversal symme- try, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 197001 (2011)

    2011

  26. [34]

    Lin and X

    S.-Z. Lin and X. Hu, Phase solitons in multi-band superconduc- tors with and without time-reversal symmetry, New Journal of Physics14, 063021 (2012)

    2012

  27. [35]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, On the rotation of liquid he- lium, Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR100, 669 (1955)

    1955

  28. [36]

    G. E. Volovik,The universe in a helium droplet, Vol. 117 (OUP Oxford, 2003)

    2003

  29. [37]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz,Statistical physics: volume 5, Vol. 5 (Elsevier, 2013)

    2013

  30. [38]

    Iskin, Extracting quantum-geometric effects from Ginzburg- Landau theory in a multiband Hubbard model, Phys

    M. Iskin, Extracting quantum-geometric effects from Ginzburg- Landau theory in a multiband Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B107, 224505 (2023)

    2023

  31. [39]

    S. A. Chen and K. T. Law, Ginzburg-Landau theory of flat- band superconductors with quantum metric, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 026002 (2024)

    2024

  32. [40]

    Thumin and G

    M. Thumin and G. Bouzerar, Correlation functions and charac- teristic length scales in flat band superconductors, SciPost Phys. 18, 025 (2025)

    2025

  33. [41]

    Argyris, M

    J. Argyris, M. Haase, and J. C. Heinrich, Finite element ap- proximation to two-dimensional sine-Gordon solitons, Com- puter Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering86, 1 (1991)

    1991

  34. [42]

    A. G. Bratsos, The solution of the two-dimensional sine-Gordon equation using the method of lines, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics206, 251 (2007)

    2007

  35. [43]

    G. J. Dolan, G. V. Chandrashekhar, T. R. Dinger, C. Feild, and F. Holtzberg, Vortex structure in YBa2Cu3O7 and evidence for intrinsic pinning, Phys. Rev. Lett.62, 827 (1989)

    1989

  36. [44]

    Prozorov, M

    R. Prozorov, M. A. Tanatar, N. Ni, A. Kreyssig, S. Nandi, S. L. Bud’ko, A. I. Goldman, and P. C. Canfield, Intrinsic pin- ning on structural domains in underdoped single crystals of Ba(Fe1−xCox)2As2, Phys. Rev. B80, 174517 (2009)

    2009

  37. [45]

    Kalisky, J

    B. Kalisky, J. R. Kirtley, J. G. Analytis, J.-H. Chu, A. Vail- ionis, I. R. Fisher, and K. A. Moler, Stripes of increased diamagnetic susceptibility in underdoped superconducting Ba(Fe1−xCox)2As2 single crystals: Evidence for an enhanced superfluid density at twin boundaries, ...

    2010

  38. [46]

    A. B. Pippard, The coherence concept in superconductivity, Physica19, 765 (1953)

    1953

  39. [47]

    A. A. Abrikosov,Fundamentals of the Theory of Metals(Courier Dover Publications, 2017). 7

    2017

  40. [48]

    G. D. Mahan,Many-particle physics(Springer Science & Busi- ness Media, 2013)

    2013

  41. [49]

    Julku, S

    A. Julku, S. Peotta, T. I. Vanhala, D.-H. Kim, and P. T ¨orm¨a, Geometric origin of superfluidity in the Lieb-lattice flat band, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 045303 (2016)

    2016

  42. [50]

    B. A. Bernevig, T. L. Hughes, and S.-C. Zhang, Quantum spin Hall effect and topological phase transition in HgTe quantum wells, Science314, 1757 (2006)

    2006

  43. [51]

    Qi, Y.-S

    X.-L. Qi, Y.-S. Wu, and S.-C. Zhang, Topological quantization of the spin Hall effect in two-dimensional paramagnetic semi- conductors, Phys. Rev. B74, 085308 (2006)

    2006

  44. [52]

    Magnetic Field Walls in Flat-band Superconductors

    S. H. Strogatz,Nonlinear dynamics and chaos: with applica- tions to physics, biology, chemistry, and engineering(Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2024). 8 Methods I. LOCAL SELF-CONSISTENCY APPROXIMATION FOR THE SUPERCONDUCTING FREE ENERGY DENSITY The local self-consistency approximation ...

    2024

  45. [53]

    at- tracting but not Lyapunov-stable

    in the phase space of(Ay, Bz)in Fig. S5, which shows that the streamlines can either come into or leave from(0,0). Point (Ay = π 2 , Bz = 0)is also a fixed point, but is a whirlpool cen- ter (neither a sink nor a source). Note:A y = π 2 is the local maximum of the cosine model...

Pith tools

Reviewed July 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.