Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 38 references

A circular island in random 2D waves produces a phase vortex around itself with probability near 50% (and near 100% at Coriolis resonances), per theory, water-tank tests, and tidal observations.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 21:51 UTC pith:BQISLT4G

load-bearing objection Solid statistical theory of island-bound vortices with good lab confirmation; the M=5 convergence claim and the four-island ocean comparison are the soft spots. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.15938 v1 pith:BQISLT4G submitted 2026-07-17 physics.flu-dyn physics.ao-phphysics.class-phphysics.optics

Vortex formation around islands in random waves

Alex J. Vernon , Junyi Ye , Wenzhe Liu , Lei Shi , Konstantin Y. Bliokh This is my paper
classification physics.flu-dyn physics.ao-phphysics.class-phphysics.optics
keywords type-II vorticesisland-bound vorticesrandom wavefieldswave scatteringtopological chargeCoriolis effecttidal vorticessubwavelength islands
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper asks a concrete question: if random waves wash over a circular island, how often does the wave phase circulate around the island? The answer it derives is surprisingly large: a singly charged island-bound vortex appears with probability approaching 0.5 once the island radius is a substantial fraction of the wavelength, even with no rotation, and can reach near certainty at quasi-trapped-mode resonances tuned by a Coriolis-like parameter. The mechanism is wave scattering off a Neumann-type boundary, which breaks mirror symmetry and couples incident plane waves into a circulating cylindrical harmonic; the vortex sits at a region of enhanced, not vanishing, intensity. The authors verify the probability curve in a laboratory water-wave tank with five random plane waves and show the same theory accounts for the observed M2 tidal vortices around Iceland, Svalbard, Madagascar, and New Zealand. If right, the result turns island vortices from an oceanographic curiosity into a generic statistical effect available to any 2D wave system with a subwavelength hole.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that type-II vortices—phase winding around an island rather than around a nodal point—are governed by a simple statistical law in random wavefields. Solving the scattering problem for a circular island with a Neumann boundary condition, the authors find that the probability of a singly charged vortex (|ℓ|=1) rises from zero and saturates near 0.5 for k0a≳1, while the probability of higher charges grows with radius; adding a Coriolis term χ makes one handedness dominant and drives the probability to nearly 1 at resonant island sizes where quasi-trapped modes form. The same calculation gives an ensemble-averaged intensity enhancement at the island boundary that div

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the wave-scattering solution (Eqs. (1)–(3)): a 2D Helmholtz equation with a Coriolis-modified Neumann boundary condition at the island edge. The incident field is a random superposition of M plane waves with uniformly random directions and phases; the scattered field is expanded in outgoing Hankel functions with coefficients b_n that depend on island radius ka and Coriolis parameter χ. The asymmetry of b_n under n→−n (caused by χ and by the random coefficients c_n) is what allows a net winding number ℓ around the island. The topological charge is computed as the phase winding of the total field around the boundary, and the statistics come from averaging over many r

Load-bearing premise

The results depend on the island enforcing a Neumann-type boundary condition (vanishing normal wave current); if real islands or defects behave more like Dirichlet (pressure-release) boundaries, the scattered field that creates the vortices becomes negligibly small for subwavelength sizes, and the high probabilities collapse.

What would settle it

Build the same water-wave tank experiment but replace the rigid cylinder (Neumann boundary) with a pressure-release boundary (approximating Dirichlet) and measure P_{|ℓ|=1} for ka≈1–2: the theory predicts the vortex probability should fall back to the open-water phase-singularity baseline instead of saturating near 0.5.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Island-bound vortices should appear generically in any 2D random wavefield containing a subwavelength obstacle with a Neumann-like boundary, not just in tides.
  • Because type-II vortices sit at intensity maxima rather than nodes, they offer a route to concentrating energy and orbital angular momentum below the diffraction limit in nanophotonic, acoustic, or electronic wave systems.
  • Tuning a Coriolis-like parameter (or a synthetic magnetic field) toward the quasi-trapped-mode resonance makes vortex formation nearly deterministic and strongly enhances boundary intensity.
  • The measured probability curve provides a quantitative benchmark: P_{|ℓ|=1}≈0.5 for ka≳1, exceeding the open-water type-I vortex probability inside the same area.
  • Observed tidal vortices around large islands can be understood as a universal scattering statistics effect, with island parameters placing them in the high-probability region.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Inference: the same statistical law should hold for non-circular islands as long as they enforce a Neumann-type condition; ellipticity may merely shift the effective radius at which the probability saturates.
  • Inference: the model's M=5 plane-wave approximation with random phases and directions is a convenient stand-in for an isotropic random field; a full continuous-spectrum calculation would test whether the 0.5 saturation is universal or depends on the number of plane waves.
  • Inference: the quasi-trapped-mode resonance suggests a practical control scheme—by modulating the effective Coriolis parameter (e.g., via rotation or a synthetic gauge field in photonics), one could switch vortex formation on and off at a fixed island radius.
  • Inference: the intensity enhancement near resonances could be used to boost nonlinear or sensing responses at subwavelength defects driven by random fields, extending demonstrated particle-manipulation effects to statistically fluctuating environments.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a statistical theory of type-II (island-bound) vortices in two-dimensional random wavefields. A circular island with Neumann boundary conditions is treated as a scatterer, with an optional Coriolis parameter, and the incident field is modeled as a superposition of M=5 plane waves with random phases and directions. Monte Carlo evaluation of the scattered field yields probability distributions for the vortex topological charge as a function of island size k0a and Coriolis strength χ. The main claims are that, without rotation, P_{|ℓ|=1} approaches about 0.5 for k0a≳1, and that near quasi-trapped-mode resonances at |χ| close to 1 the vortex probability approaches 1. The predictions are compared with M2 tidal vortices around Iceland, Svalbard, Madagascar, and New Zealand, and with laboratory gravity-capillary wave experiments, with reported good agreement.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper provides a simple, general mechanism for vortex formation around subwavelength islands in random wavefields, potentially explaining ocean tidal vortices and suggesting applications in nanophotonics and other 2D wave systems. The scattering coefficients in Eq. (3) are derived cleanly from the stated boundary condition, and the probability predictions involve no fitted parameters for the vortex statistics. The laboratory experiment is a valuable independent test, and the comparison with four real ocean islands is suggestive. The main weakness is that the universality of the predictions is asserted on the basis of an M=5 incident-field ensemble, with the convergence check only cited rather than demonstrated.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III, Fig. 3] The central probabilities P_{|ℓ|=1}≈0.5 and P_ℓ≈1 at quasi-trapped resonances are computed with M=5 incident plane waves. The text states, without data or an analytic argument, that 'choosing larger M does not produce a significant difference in the vortex statistics.' This assertion is load-bearing for the claim that the results describe generic random wavefields, not just five-mode superpositions. Please supply the convergence check explicitly, e.g., P_{|ℓ|=1}(k0a) and the resonant P_ℓ values for M=10, 50, 100, and show that the tail of the distribution is stable.
  2. [Section IV, Fig. 4(c)] The laboratory experiment also uses M=5, with fixed directions ϕ_m ≃ 2πm/M and only phases and amplitudes randomized, whereas the Section III model uses random directions and equal amplitudes. The M=50 dotted curves in Fig. 4(c) appear only for type-I vortices, not for type-II. Therefore the experiment cannot independently validate convergence to the many-plane-wave or isotropic random-wave regime. Because the paper's headline 'random wavefields' claim depends on this convergence, the authors should provide a numerical M-study for type-II statistics under both equal and random-amplitude distributions.
  3. [Section II, Eq. (1)] The paper correctly emphasizes that the Neumann boundary condition is essential; it also acknowledges that real ocean islands are idealized here. However, the abstract and conclusions generalize to 'nanophotonic structures' and other 2D systems. If those systems are governed by Dirichlet or other boundary conditions, the predicted high probabilities may not apply. This is a stated limitation, but its implications for the breadth of the central claim could be discussed more explicitly, especially since the paper cites [36] showing negligible scattering for Dirichlet subwavelength holes.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (2)] The definition of c_n appears with 'PN' where the number of incident waves M is meant. Please correct the typo and ensure consistent notation.
  2. [Table I] Svalbard is listed with χ=1. The model assumes |χ|<1 in the main development, and the trajectory-frequency relation involves |χ|→1 as the resonance limit. Clarify whether χ=1 is treated as a limiting case or as an actual parameter of the scattering calculation.
  3. [Section III, Fig. 3(d)] The ensemble-averaged intensity formula in the text could be written out more transparently with the definition of H_n(kρ); currently the notation mixes H_n and H_n^{(1)}. This is cosmetic but would improve reproducibility.
  4. [Section IV, experimental parameters] The experimental amplitude range A_m ∈ [0.4,1.6] produces a non-equal-amplitude incident field, while the theory in Section III assumes equal amplitudes. The text says the experiment agrees with the model, but it does not state whether the numerical curves in Fig. 4(c) use the experimental amplitude statistics or equal amplitudes. Please specify.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the vortex probabilities are computed from an explicit scattering model and checked against independent experiments; no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The model is defined by the wave problem (1), the exact scattering expansion (2), and the scattering coefficients (3); the probabilities P_l(a,χ) are numerical outputs over random incident-field realizations, not inputs. No parameter is fitted to the vortex statistics: the water-wave experiment uses independently chosen cylinder radii and random phases/amplitudes, and the ocean-island comparison uses physically estimated Coriolis parameters and island sizes (Table I), not values tuned to reproduce the observed vortex charges. The quasi-trapped-mode resonances are rationalized via the scattering coefficients b_n, but the probabilities themselves are computed from the full scattered field rather than equated to |b_n| by construction. The main caveat—the statement in Section III that 'choosing larger M does not produce a significant difference in the vortex statistics' is asserted without shown data, and the experiment also uses M=5—is a robustness/external-validity concern about convergence to a generic random wavefield, not a circularity, because the predicted probabilities are not defined by that assertion. Self-citations [24,25] supply prior context and examples of type-II vortices but are not load-bearing for the new statistical result.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The prediction is generated by a standard scattering model with no parameters fitted to the vortex statistics. The only estimated inputs are physical island parameters for the ocean comparison. The model relies on a Neumann boundary condition and an idealized random-plane-wave incident field; both are stated in the paper.

free parameters (4)
  • Number of incident plane waves M = 5
    Model parameter; authors verified larger M does not change vortex statistics significantly. Not fitted to target.
  • Truncation order |n| = 5
    Scattered-field truncation; higher orders negligible, verified numerically.
  • Experiment amplitude range A_m = [0.4,1.6]
    Experimental design choice to randomize incident amplitudes; central theory not dependent on exact range.
  • Estimated k0a for ocean islands = 0.38 (Iceland), 0.48 (Svalbard), 0.63 (Madagascar), 0.73 (New Zealand)
    Estimated from circumscribed circle radius and representative depth from bathymetry; not fitted to vortex charge. Used to compare with theory; ±35% uncertainty.
axioms (6)
  • standard math Linear 2D scalar wave equation with Coriolis-modified dispersion (ω²−Ω²)/c²=k²
    Eq. (1); standard shallow-water/2D wave model for monochromatic waves.
  • domain assumption Neumann boundary condition at the island: normal component of wave current vanishes
    Eq. (1) second line; paper explicitly says 'The Neumann boundary condition is essential'; with Dirichlet, subwavelength holes produce negligible perturbations [36].
  • domain assumption Random incident field represented by M plane waves with independent uniformly distributed phases and directions
    Section III; approximates isotropic random waves; M=5 checked for convergence.
  • standard math Scattered field expanded in outgoing cylindrical Hankel functions H_n^(1)(kρ)e^{inφ}
    Eq. (2); standard multipole expansion for a circular scatterer.
  • domain assumption Idealized circular island, uniform ocean depth, and regular coastline for ocean comparisons
    Section II: 'We also emphasize that Eqs. (1) constitute an idealized model of tidal waves around real islands, neglecting irregular coastlines, continental shelves, and spatial variations of the ocean depth.'
  • domain assumption Weak-Coriolis regime |Ω|<ω
    Section II focuses on |Ω|<ω; strong-Coriolis trapped Kelvin waves (|Ω|>ω) are outside the claimed regime.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 10432 in / 14135 out tokens · 148534 ms · 2026-08-01T21:51:33.491588+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Wave vortices are fundamental topological features of interference fields, occurring at nodal points where the wave amplitude vanishes. A distinct class of vortices can instead form around it islands or `holes' in two-dimensional wavefields, where the wave intensity remains finite and may even peak at the boundary. In particular, such vortices occur in M2 ocean tides around New Zealand, Madagascar, Iceland, and Svalbard, yet the conditions governing their appearance have remained elusive. Here we develop a statistical theory of vortices around islands in random two-dimensional wavefields, with and without the Coriolis effect, and test it experimentally. We determine the probabilities of vortices with different topological charges as functions of island size and Coriolis parameter. We find that island-bound vortices emerge with unexpectedly high probability, approaching 50% in non-rotating systems and nearly 100% in rotating systems. Moreover, for a broad range of parameters, the presence of a subwavelength island dramatically enhances vortex formation compared with homogeneous random wavefields. Our results explain the formation of tidal vortices around ocean islands of particular sizes (~0.1 of the characteristic wavelength) and establish a general mechanism for generating localized high-intensity vortices around defects in diverse wave systems, from water waves to nanophotonic structures.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.15938 by Alex J. Vernon, Junyi Ye, Konstantin Y. Bliokh, Lei Shi, Wenzhe Liu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: illustrates this mechanism for a single inci￾dent plane wave, M = 1, with ϕ1 = α1 = 0, which impinges on a subwavelength island of radius a = 1/k0 (where k0 = ω/c). The magnitudes of the lower-order scattering coefficients bn, n = −2, ...2 (higher-order coef￾ficients are negligible) are plotted in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Dislocations in wave trains,

    J. F. Nye and M. V. Berry, “Dislocations in wave trains,” Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A336, 165 (1974)

    1974

  2. [2]

    Rotating waves,

    P. H. Ceperley, “Rotating waves,” Am. J. Phys.60, 938 (1992)

    1992

  3. [3]

    Orbital angular momentum of light and the transformation of Laguerre-Gaussian laser modes,

    L. Allen, M. W. Beijersbergen, R. J. C. Spereeuw, and J. P. Woerdman, “Orbital angular momentum of light and the transformation of Laguerre-Gaussian laser modes,” Phys. Rev. A45, 8185–8189 (1992)

    1992

  4. [4]

    Singular optics,

    M. S. Soskin and M. V. Vasnetsov, “Singular optics,” Prog. Opt.42, 219–276 (2001)

    2001

  5. [5]

    Sin- gular Optics: Optical Vortices and Polarization Singular- ities,

    M. R. Dennis, K. O’Holleran, and M. J. Padgett, “Sin- gular Optics: Optical Vortices and Polarization Singular- ities,” Prog. Opt.53, 293 (2009)

    2009

  6. [6]

    Allen, S

    L. Allen, S. M. Barnett, and M. J. Padgett,Optical Angular Momentum(IoP Publishing, 2003)

    2003

  7. [7]

    D. L. Andrews and M. Babiker,The Angular Momen- tum of Light(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, UK, 2012)

    2012

  8. [8]

    An acoustical helicoidal wave transducer with applications for the alignment of ultrasonic and underwater systems,

    B. T. Hefner and P. L. Marston, “An acoustical helicoidal wave transducer with applications for the alignment of ultrasonic and underwater systems,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 106, 3313–3316 (1999)

    1999

  9. [9]

    A review on acoustic vortices: Generation, characterization, applications and perspectives,

    S. Guo, Z. Ya, P. Wu, and M. Wan, “A review on acoustic vortices: Generation, characterization, applications and perspectives,” J. Appl. Phys.132, 3475–3478 (2022)

    2022

  10. [10]

    Study of surface plasmon chirality induced by Archimedes’ spiral grooves,

    T. Ohno and S. Miyanishi, “Study of surface plasmon chirality induced by Archimedes’ spiral grooves,” Opt. Express14, 6285–6290 (2006)

    2006

  11. [11]

    Orbital angular momentum in nanoplasmonic vortices,

    E. Prinz, M. Hartelt, G. Spektor, M. Orenstein, and M. Aeschlimann, “Orbital angular momentum in nanoplasmonic vortices,” ACS Photonics10, 340–367 (2023)

    2023

  12. [12]

    Theory and applications of free-electron vortex states,

    K. Y. Bliokh, I. P. Ivanov, G. Guzzinati, L. Clark, R. Van Boxem, A. B´ ech´ e, R. Juchtmans, M. A. Alonso, P. Schattschneider, F. Nori, and J. Verbeeck, “Theory and applications of free-electron vortex states,” Phys. Rep.690, 1–70 (2017)

    2017

  13. [13]

    Controlling neutron orbital angular momentum,

    C. W. Clark, R. Barankov, M. G. Huber, M. Arif, D. G. Cory, and D. A. Pushin, “Controlling neutron orbital angular momentum,” Nature525, 504–506 (2015)

    2015

  14. [14]

    Vortex beams of atoms and molecules,

    A. Luski, Y. Segev, R. David, O. Bitton, H. Nadler, A. R. Barnea, A. Gorlach, O. Cheshnovsky, I. Kaminer, and E. Narevicius, “Vortex beams of atoms and molecules,” Science373, 1105–1109 (2021)

    2021

  15. [15]

    Water-wave vortices and skyrmions,

    D. A. Smirnova, F. Nori, and K. Y. Bliokh, “Water-wave vortices and skyrmions,” Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 054003 (2024)

    2024

  16. [16]

    Topological water-wave structures manipulating particles,

    B. Wang, Z. Che, C. Cheng, C. Tong, L. Shi, Y. Shen, K. Y. Bliokh, and J. Zi, “Topological water-wave structures manipulating particles,” Nature638, 394–400 (2025)

    2025

  17. [17]

    Phase sad- dles and dislocations in two-dimensional waves such as the tides,

    J. F. Nye, J. V. Hajnal, and J. H. Hannay, “Phase sad- dles and dislocations in two-dimensional waves such as the tides,” Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A417, 7–20 (1988). 8

    1988

  18. [18]

    Geometry of phase and polarization sin- gularities illustrated by edge diffraction and the tides,

    M. V. Berry, “Geometry of phase and polarization sin- gularities illustrated by edge diffraction and the tides,” Proc. SPIE4403, 1–12 (2001)

    2001

  19. [19]

    The New Zealand semi- diurnal tide,

    J. A. T. Bye and R. A. Heath, “The New Zealand semi- diurnal tide,” J. Mar. Res.33, 423–442 (1975)

    1975

  20. [20]

    Phase distribution of tidal constituents around New Zealand,

    R. A. Heath, “Phase distribution of tidal constituents around New Zealand,” New Zeal. J. Mar. Freshw. Res. 11, 383–392 (1977)

    1977

  21. [21]

    A review of the physical oceanography of the seas around New Zealand – 1982,

    R. A. Heath, “A review of the physical oceanography of the seas around New Zealand – 1982,” New Zeal. J. Mar. Freshw. Res.19, 79–124 (1985)

    1982

  22. [22]

    Ocean tides around New Zealand,

    R. A. Walters, D. G. Goring, and R. G. Bell, “Ocean tides around New Zealand,” New Zeal. J. Mar. Freshw. Res.35, 567–579 (2001)

    2001

  23. [23]

    Physical oceanography of New Zealand/Aotearoa shelf seas – a review,

    C. L. Stevens, J. M. O’Callaghan, S. M. Chiswell, and M. G. Hadfield, “Physical oceanography of New Zealand/Aotearoa shelf seas – a review,” New Zeal. J. Mar. Freshw. Res.55, 6–45 (2021)

    2021

  24. [24]

    High-intensity wave vortices around subwavelength holes: From ocean tides to nanooptics,

    K. Domina, P. Alonso-Gonz´ alez, A. Bylinkin, M. Barra- Burillo, A. I. F. Tresguerres-Mata, F. Javier Alfaro- Mozaz, S. V´ elez, F. Casanova, L. E. Hueso, R. Hillen- brand, K. Y. Bliokh, and A. Y. Nikitin, “High-intensity wave vortices around subwavelength holes: From ocean tides to nanooptics,” Newton1, 100060 (2025)

    2025

  25. [25]

    Wave Vortices Around Oscillating Subwavelength Holes: Water-Wave Observation

    J. Ye, Z. Li, A. Y. Nikitin, F. Nori, W. Liu, K. Y. Bliokh, and L. Shi, “Wave Vortices Around Oscillat- ing Subwavelength Holes: Water-Wave Observation,” arXiv:2604.26677 (2026), 10.48550/arXiv.2604.26677

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.26677 2026

  26. [26]

    Plasmonic Aharonov-Bohm effect: Optical spin as the magnetic flux parameter,

    Y. Gorodetski, S. Nechayev, V. Kleiner, and E. Has- man, “Plasmonic Aharonov-Bohm effect: Optical spin as the magnetic flux parameter,” Phys. Rev. B82, 125433 (2010)

    2010

  27. [27]

    Ul- trafast generation and control of an electron vortex beam via chiral plasmonic near fields,

    G. M. Vanacore, G. Berruto, I. Madan, E. Pomarico, P. Biagioni, R. J. Lamb, D. McGrouther, O. Rein- hardt, I. Kaminer, B. Barwick, H. Larocque, V. Grillo, E. Karimi, F. J. Garc ´ ıa de Abajo, and F. Carbone, “Ul- trafast generation and control of an electron vortex beam via chiral plasmonic near fields,” Nat. Mater.18, 573–579 (2019)

    2019

  28. [28]

    Near-field imaging of surface-plasmon vortex- modes around a single elliptical nanohole in a gold film,

    C. Triolo, S. Savasta, A. Settineri, S. Trusso, R. Saija, N.R. Agarwal, and S. Patan` e, “Near-field imaging of surface-plasmon vortex- modes around a single elliptical nanohole in a gold film,” Sci. Rep.9, 5320 (2019)

    2019

  29. [29]

    Inferring deep ocean tidal energy dissipation from the global high- resolution data-assimilative HAMTIDE model,

    E. Taguchi, D. Stammer, and W. Zahel, “Inferring deep ocean tidal energy dissipation from the global high- resolution data-assimilative HAMTIDE model,” J. Geo- phys. Res. Oceans119, 4573–4592 (2014)

    2014

  30. [30]

    isotropic random waves

    The average intensity is well approximated by ⟨Ires⟩ ≃M|bℓ|2|H (1) ℓ (kρ)|2 in this case (see SM). We now compare these predictions with the observed type-II vortices in the M2 tides around Iceland, Sval- bard, Madagascar, and New Zealand [Fig. 1(a)]. For these islands, the dimensionless Coriolis parameter is χ= (2Ω E/ω) sinθ= (2T M2 /TE) sinθ≃1.035 sinθ,...

    2022

  31. [31]

    On the trapping of wave energy round islands,

    M. S. Longuet-Higgins, “On the trapping of wave energy round islands,” J. Fluid Mech.29, 781–821 (1967)

    1967

  32. [32]

    On the trapping of waves along a discontinuity of depth in a rotating ocean,

    M. S. Longuet-Higgins, “On the trapping of waves along a discontinuity of depth in a rotating ocean,” J. Fluid Mech.31, 417–434 (1968)

    1968

  33. [33]

    On the trapping of long-period waves round islands,

    M. S. Longuet-Higgins, “On the trapping of long-period waves round islands,” J. Fluid Mech.37, 773–784 (1969)

    1969

  34. [34]

    Phase singularities in isotropic random waves,

    M. V. Berry and M. R. Dennis, “Phase singularities in isotropic random waves,” Proc. R. Soc. A456, 2059–2079 (2000)

    2059

  35. [35]

    Density and correlation functions of vortex and saddle points in open billiard systems,

    R. H¨ ohmann, U. Kuhl, H.-J. St¨ ockmann, J. D. Urbina, and M. R. Dennis, “Density and correlation functions of vortex and saddle points in open billiard systems,” Phys. Rev. E79, 016203 (2009)

    2009

  36. [36]

    Spatial Distribution of Phase Singularities in Optical Random Vector Waves,

    L. De Angelis, F. Alpeggiani, A. Di Falco, and L. Kuipers, “Spatial Distribution of Phase Singularities in Optical Random Vector Waves,” Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 093901 (2016)

    2016

  37. [37]

    Logarithmic pinpricks in wavefunctions,

    M. V. Berry, “Logarithmic pinpricks in wavefunctions,” Eur. J. Phys.45, 025304 (2024)

    2024

  38. [38]

    Real-time quantitative Schlieren imaging by fast Fourier demodulation of a checkered backdrop,

    S. Wildeman, “Real-time quantitative Schlieren imaging by fast Fourier demodulation of a checkered backdrop,” Exp. Fluids59, 97 (2018)

    2018