Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 113 references

Relativistic Lattice Boltzmann Methods: Theory and Applications

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A systematic suite of relativistic lattice Boltzmann simulations, built on Maxwell-Jüttner moment-preserving quadratures, shows that the Chapman-Enskog expansion—not Grad's moments method—correctly maps the kinetic relaxation time to…

desk verdict A solid methods review with a well-supported central claim: in the Anderson-Witting RTA, CE transport coefficients are the ones realized in RLBM simulations; the main soft spot is that quadrature error is only quantified for shear viscosity. read the letter →

arxiv 1909.04502 v2 pith:63PATKXX submitted 2019-08-29 hep-lat gr-qchep-phhep-thphysics.comp-phphysics.flu-dyn

A. Gabbana , D. Simeoni , S. Succi , R. Tripiccione This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-latgr-qchep-phhep-thphysics.comp-phphysics.flu-dyn MSC 76P0582C4076Y05 PACS 47.11.Qr47.75.+f
keywords relativisticlatticeBoltzmannmethodChapman-EnskogexpansionGrad'smomentsAnderson-Wittingrelaxation-timemodelMaxwell-Jüttnerdistributiontransportcoefficientsquark-gluonplasmagrapheneelectronhydrodynamics
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 builds a unified relativistic lattice Boltzmann method—a mesoscopic simulation scheme in which pseudo-particles stream and collide on a regular grid—that spans the full kinematic range from ultra-relativistic ($k_B T \gg mc^2$) to near non-relativistic ($k_B T \ll mc^2$) fluids in 1, 2, or 3 spatial dimensions. Its central claim is quantitative: the Chapman-Enskog expansion, not Grad's method of moments, is the procedure that correctly links the mesoscopic relaxation time $\tau$ of the Anderson-Witting kinetic model to the macroscopic transport coefficients—shear viscosity $\eta$, bulk viscosity $\mu$, and thermal conductivity $\lambda$. The paper establishes this by measuring each coefficient from lattice simulations (Taylor-Green vortex decay for $\eta$, steady heat flow for $\lambda$, damped compressible waves for $\mu$) and comparing against the two analytic predictions across values of $\zeta = mc^2/k_B T$. If the claim holds, simulation parameters in relativistic dissipative hydrodynamics can be calibrated from first principles, which matters directly for quark-gluon plasma studies and for electronic flows in graphene.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing construction is a Gauss-type quadrature on a Cartesian lattice that preserves, up to a chosen order $N$, the moments of the Maxwell-Jüttner equilibrium distribution. The equilibrium is expanded in relativistic orthogonal polynomials built by a Gram-Schmidt procedure with the Maxwell-Jüttner weight in the fluid rest frame, so the expansion coefficients coincide with the moments by construction; the quadrature then assigns nonnegative weights to lattice velocities so that streaming remains exact, with particles hopping between neighboring sites and no round-off error in motion. The dimensionless parameter $\zeta = mc^2/k_B T$ organizes the whole scheme: stencils are tuned per value of $\zeta$, with a special energy-shell construction for the massless limit, giving a single framework that interpolates between the equations of state $P = nk_B T$ with $\epsilon = dP$ (ultra-relativistic) and $\epsilon_c = (d/2)P$ (non-relativistic). Transport coefficients are then extracted through the Chapman-Enskog constitutive relations, which express $\lambda$, $\mu$, and $\eta$ as functions of $\tau$ multiplied by thermodynamic factors such as $P$, $n$, and the ratio $G_d = \zeta K_{(d+3)/2}(\zeta)/K_{(d+1)/2}(\zeta)$ of modified Bessel functions; the simulations measure decay rates (Taylor-Green vortex for shear, Fourier heat flow for conduction, damped sound-like waves for bulk) and read off the coefficient that matches the analytic formula.

What would settle it

Measure the shear viscosity in the gap $0 < \zeta \lesssim 1$, where the paper's Cartesian velocity sets fail, using an off-lattice scheme with the same Anderson-Witting collision term: the Chapman-Enskog claim requires $\eta/(P\tau) \to 4/5$ in the ultra-relativistic limit in 3+1 dimensions, whereas Grad's method predicts $3/4$. A sharper variant is to repeat the Taylor-Green vortex decay at $\zeta = 0$ with the fifth-order quadrature listed in Appendix H and check whether the estimate moves from the two third-order stencils' values, which differ by 1–2%, toward $4/5$; a persistent drift toward $3/4$ would refute the Chapman-Enskog conclusion.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the Chapman-Enskog expansion supplies the correct bridge between the mesoscopic and macroscopic layers of relativistic kinetic theory in the relaxation-time approximation. For a gas described by the Anderson-Witting equation with Maxwell-Jüttner equilibrium, the two standard analytic routes to the transport coefficients disagree in the relativistic regime: in the ultra-relativistic limit in $d$ spatial dimensions, Chapman-Enskog gives $\eta/(P\tau) = (d+1)/(d+2)$ while Grad's method gives $(d+1)/(d+3)$, with analogous discrepancies in $\lambda$ and $\mu$. The authors measure all three coefficients from relativistic lattice Boltzmann simulations in $d = 1, 2, 3$ and find, with no free parameters, that the data follow the Chapman-Enskog curves over the whole range of $\zeta$; in the ultra-relativistic limit in 3+1 dimensions they recover $\eta/(P\tau) = 4/5$ to four significant figures. The paper therefore claims to provide a numerical answer to a question that no experiment has yet settled: which of the two long-standing analytic methods is the correct one.

Load-bearing premise

The discretization of momentum space keeps enough information about the equilibrium distribution that the measured decay rates equal the true continuum transport coefficients within the claimed accuracy, even though each velocity set only works for a limited range of mass-to-temperature ratios and two different third-order velocity sets differ from each other by 1–2%.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Choosing the relaxation time $\tau$ fixes $\lambda$, $\mu$, and $\eta$ through the Chapman-Enskog formulas in $d = 1, 2, 3$, so simulation parameters in relativistic lattice Boltzmann codes can be calibrated directly instead of tuned ad hoc.
  • The scheme gives researchers a numerical touchstone for analytic relativistic kinetic theory, since it can discriminate between competing derivations of transport coefficients in a regime where no direct experiment currently exists.
  • A single quadrature framework now covers the whole range from ultra-relativistic massless particles to nearly non-relativistic massive ones, so one code base can serve both quark-gluon plasma and graphene electron-flow problems.
  • Because the macroscopic transport coefficients are universal properties of the fluid, the numerical support for Chapman-Enskog in the relaxation-time approximation suggests the same route is the correct one for more elaborate collision operators as well.
  • The validated agreement with analytic Sod shock-tube solutions and with Monte Carlo solutions of the relativistic Boltzmann equation extends confidence in the method to strong-gradient, far-from-equilibrium flows.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A test the paper leaves implicit: rerun the Taylor-Green shear measurement at $\zeta = 0$ with the fifth-order quadratures listed in Appendix H and check whether the 1–2% spread between third-order stencils shrinks, which would isolate the residual error as purely quadrature-related.
  • The dimension-independent construction makes a direct check of the $d \to \infty$ limit (where both methods coincide at classical values, as in Fig. 3) feasible by simulating in $d = 4$ or $5$.
  • The calibrated viscosity-to-entropy ratio in the ultra-relativistic regime could be compared against the holographic bound $1/4\pi$ mentioned in the introduction; the paper does not make that comparison.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. This manuscript presents a systematic account of relativistic lattice Boltzmann methods (RLBMs) in d=1,2,3 spatial dimensions. The authors construct Cartesian-lattice quadratures from orthogonal-polynomial expansions of the Maxwell-Jüttner distribution, derive Chapman-Enskog and Grad transport coefficients for the Anderson-Witting single-relaxation-time model, and measure the shear viscosity, thermal conductivity, and bulk viscosity in RLBM simulations. They report agreement with the Chapman-Enskog formulas over a range of relativistic parameters ζ, and validate the scheme against analytic shock-tube solutions, BAMPS and Monte Carlo kinetic solvers, and analytic graphene flow profiles. The conclusions claim that the Chapman-Enskog procedure is the correct link between the mesoscopic relaxation time and macroscopic transport coefficients.

Significance. The paper is a substantial methods contribution. Its analytic derivations in Appendix C are detailed and dimension-general, and the numerical measurements extract transport coefficients from simulated decay rates and fluxes rather than directly evaluating the CE formulas, so the comparison is not circular. The paper also provides explicit quadrature stencils and a range of validation benchmarks against independent solvers, which strengthens the practical usefulness of the method. If the CE correspondence is accepted, the paper provides a parameter-free calibration of τ to λ, η and μ that is directly relevant for QGP and graphene simulations. The main risks are numerical: the absence of systematic quadrature-error estimates for two of the three measured coefficients and the limited ζ coverage noted by the authors themselves.

major comments (3)
  1. [§7.2–7.3 (Figs. 9–10)] The central claim of Sec. 9—that the CE formulas correctly link λ, η and μ to τ—relies on the simulations discriminating between the CE and Grad curves. For the shear viscosity this discrimination is supported by the two-stencil comparison and grid-convergence study reported in Sec. 7.1 and the inset of Fig. 8, which gives a systematic error of about 1–2%. No analogous cross-check is reported for the thermal-conductivity measurement of Sec. 7.2 (based on the heat flux in Eq. 85) or for the bulk-viscosity measurement of Sec. 7.3 (based on the dynamic pressure in Eq. 87). Because the equilibrium distribution is expanded only to third polynomial order (Sec. 5.2), the higher moments that enter the heat-flux and trace observables may be more sensitive to the quadrature than the shear stress is, and the quadrature error could in principle be comparable to the CE–Grad separation. The authors should supply the same two-quadrature stencil comparison for λ and μ, or otherwise quantify the sensitivity of Figs. 9 and 10 to the discretization.
  2. [§7.3 (Eq. 88)] The bulk-viscosity measurement is the least resolved of the three. The values of μ/(Pτ) in Fig. 10 are at most about 0.016, the CE and Grad predictions are close except at the smallest ζ values, and the text reports no statistical error bars, no check on the finite-difference estimate of ∇·U, and no sensitivity study of the threshold |∇·U|>10^{-10} used when averaging Eq. 88. Without such robustness information, the bulk-viscosity panel is weaker evidence for the CE claim than the shear-viscosity panel, and the authors should either provide error estimates or state explicitly the precision with which the CE–Grad difference in μ is resolved.
  3. [§4.2 and §9] The concluding statement that 'the CE approach is the one correctly linking all macroscopic transport coefficients' and that this 'solves the problem in the relaxation-time approximation' is broader than what the numerical tests establish. As Sec. 4.2 itself notes, the Grad comparator used here is the original 14-moment closure, which Denicol et al. [19] showed should be replaced by an irreducible-moment formulation; the simulations therefore discriminate CE from one specific (and admittedly flawed) moment-method variant, not from all moment or Israel–Stewart-type closures. The conclusions should be rephrased to the CE-vs-original-Grad comparison actually performed, unless the authors add a comparison against a modern irreducible-moment version.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3, Eq. (20)] The displayed expression for the sound speed contains a stray 'v' before the square root; it should read c_s = c sqrt{...}.
  2. [§7.3] The sentence 'The results results presented in Fig. 10' contains a duplicated word 'results'.
  3. [§5.3 and Appendix H] For the massive-particle quadratures, the stencils are listed but the weights are relegated to the supplemental material; including at least one fully specified third-order example (weights and v0) in the appendix would improve reproducibility.
  4. [§7.1, Table 2] The table reports that statistical errors are below one unit in the last displayed digit, but no measure of systematic error is given in the table; since the inset of Fig. 8 indicates 1–2% quadrature-dependent scatter, a statement reconciling these two error measures would help.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the measured transport coefficients are emergent outputs of the discrete kinetic simulation, not restatements of the Chapman-Enskog formulas.

full rationale

The central claim is that RLBM simulations reproduce the Chapman-Enskog values of lambda, eta, and mu in d=1,2,3, as opposed to Grad's-method values. The measured coefficients are extracted from genuinely macroscopic observables: the Taylor-Green decay rate for eta (Eq. 81), the steady-state heat flux and temperature gradient for lambda (Eqs. 84-85), and the dynamic pressure over velocity divergence for mu (Eqs. 87-88). None of these measurements uses the CE transport-coefficient formulas as an input; the analytic CE and Grad expressions are derived separately in Appendix C from the continuum Anderson-Witting equation. The RLBM itself is a discretization of the same Boltzmann equation via moment-preserving quadratures, and its effective transport coefficients are emergent, as demonstrated by the paper's own systematic-error estimate: two different third-order stencils differ by about 1-2% in the shear-viscosity measurement (Section 7.1 inset), showing that the numerical result is not fixed by construction. External benchmarks (Sod shock tube against analytic solutions and BAMPS, Poiseuille flow against the analytic profile, graphene flow against the analytic potential) anchor the solver independently of the CE-versus-Grad question. Self-citations to prior work [45,47,49,90] summarize and extend earlier results, but the present paper contains its own numerical data, tables, and figures, so the claim does not reduce to a self-citation chain. The stated numerical limitations, such as the lack of stable Cartesian quadratures for 0<zeta<~1 and the quadrature-error estimates, are honest accuracy caveats rather than circular reasoning. Therefore no circular step is present.

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

The central analytic results involve no fitted parameters: transport coefficients are derived as functions of the relaxation time and thermodynamic variables. The numerical implementation introduces reference temperature, lattice velocity scale, and benchmark amplitudes that are chosen by hand; these affect discretization error but not the theoretical comparison. The Anderson-Witting relaxation-time approximation is the key physical assumption.

free parameters (3)
  • Reference temperature T0 = Set so that lattice temperature is O(1), e.g., T0 = 400 MeV in the shock-tube test
    Chosen by hand as the expansion origin for the Maxwell-Juttner distribution in lattice units; it is a unit-conversion scale, not a fitted physical constant.
  • Lattice velocity scale v0 = e.g., 0.2726 for the 2D m=5 second-order stencil; 1/sqrt(41) for the 3D ultra-relativistic third-order stencil
    Free parameter in the Gauss quadrature construction, Eqs. 54-55, scanned to find positive weights. It controls the streaming speed and stencil layout, not the physical transport coefficients.
  • Initial velocity amplitude u0 in benchmarks = 0.2 (Taylor-Green vortex), 1e-5 (bulk viscosity sine wave)
    Chosen small enough to stay near the linear regime; the vortex analysis assumes a single exponential decay with constant P + epsilon.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Anderson-Witting relaxation-time approximation for the relativistic Boltzmann equation (single relaxation time tau).
    Eq. 2 is the starting kinetic model; all transport coefficients and simulations are derived from it. If the RTA is inaccurate for a physical system, the validated CE link does not transfer.
  • domain assumption Landau-Lifshitz definition of the fluid four-velocity and the associated frame choice.
    Section 4 defines the frame via T^alpha beta U_beta = epsilon U^alpha; the transport coefficients depend on this choice.
  • domain assumption Maxwell-Juttner distribution as the local equilibrium and ideal gas equation of state P = n k_B T.
    Eq. 3 and Section 3; the equilibrium distribution and EOS are inputs to both the CE expansion and the lattice scheme.
  • standard math The Chapman-Enskog expansion is valid: the non-equilibrium part of the distribution is a small first-order correction in Knudsen number.
    Section 4.1 and Appendix C.1; standard perturbation theory for the Boltzmann equation.
  • domain assumption The orthogonal polynomial expansion and Gauss quadrature with the chosen stencils preserve the moments required to recover transport coefficients.
    Sections 5.2-5.3; the discrete equilibrium matches moments up to order N, yet transport coefficients involve higher moments (e.g., a43 requires fourth-order tensor integrals). The paper estimates the resulting systematic error at 1-2%.
  • domain assumption The Taylor-Green vortex decays with a single exponential F(t) = exp(-2 eta t/(P + epsilon)) with approximately constant P + epsilon.
    Section 7.1, Eq. 81; used to extract shear viscosity from simulations. Compressible and nonlinear effects are neglected, justified by small u0 and late-time fitting.
  • domain assumption For the thermal conductivity benchmark, the flow is slow enough that Fourier's law q = lambda grad T holds.
    Section 7.2; small Delta T = 0.01 in lattice units justifies the non-relativistic approximation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Relativistic Lattice Boltzmann Methods: Theory and Applications." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/63PATKXX

@misc{pith2026190904502,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Relativistic Lattice Boltzmann Methods: Theory and Applications},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/63PATKXX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1909.04502}
}
abstract

We present a systematic account of recent developments of the relativistic Lattice Boltzmann method (RLBM) for dissipative hydrodynamics. We describe in full detail a unified, compact and dimension-independent procedure to design relativistic LB schemes capable of bridging the gap between the ultra-relativistic regime, $k_{\rm B} T \gg mc^2$, and the non-relativistic one, $k_{\rm B} T \ll mc^2$. We further develop a systematic derivation of the transport coefficients as a function of the kinetic relaxation time in $d=1,2,3$ spatial dimensions. The latter step allows to establish a quantitative bridge between the parameters of the kinetic model and the macroscopic transport coefficients. This leads to accurate calibrations of simulation parameters and is also relevant at the theoretical level, as it provides neat numerical evidence of the correctness of the Chapman-Enskog procedure. We present an extended set of validation tests, in which simulation results based on the RLBMs are compared with existing analytic or semi-analytic results in the mildly-relativistic ($k_{\rm B} T \sim mc^2$) regime for the case of shock propagations in quark-gluon plasmas and laminar electronic flows in ultra-clean graphene samples. It is hoped and expected that the material collected in this paper may allow the interested readers to reproduce the present results and generate new applications of the RLBM scheme.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1909.04502 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Sketch of the history of the universe as a function of time and temperature. As the universe evolves in time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Ratio of kinetic energy density (normalized on the number of spatial dimensions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison of the non-dimensional thermal conductivity, shear and bulk viscosity in 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (15 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison of the analytic Maxwell Juttner distribution in (2 ¨ + 1) dimensions against approximations at various orders N, computed using an orthogonal polynomial basis. The distributions are shown as functions of p = (px, 0), having fixed all the other parameters to …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Two examples of stencil compatible with a third order quadrature, respectively for ˜m [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Visual representation of the parametric solution of Eq. 50, having chosen ˜m [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Simulated time evolution of ¯u for selected τ values on a L = 400 square lattice. Simulation are performed using a (3 + 1)-dimensional solver, with initial numerical parameters ζ = 0, u0 = 0.2, n = 1, T = 1. Dashed lines are fits to the exponential decay predicted by E…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of the non-dimensional shear viscosity for a relativistic gas in (1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Comparison of the non-dimensional thermal conductivity for a relativistic gas in (1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Comparison of the non-dimensional bulk viscosity for a relativistic gas in (1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Validation of the forcing scheme for the RLBM algorithm by solving a non-relativistic Poiseuille flow. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Example of analytic solution of the Sod’s shock tube problem in the inviscid limit, for an ultra-relativistic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Sod’s shock tube for a gas of massless particles in (d [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p041_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Sod’s shock tube for a gas of massless particles at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p042_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Sod’s shock tube for a gas of massive particles ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p043_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Temperature profile of the system in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p044_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Electrochemical potential measured at several fixed distances from the side of the graphene sample, re [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p046_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: a) Sketch of the ”vicinity-geometry” used in simulations: Two contacts are used to inject (red area) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p047_18.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

113 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages

  1. [19]

    G. S. Denicol, H. Niemi, E. Moln ´ar, D. H. Rischke, Derivation of transient relativistic fluid dynamics from the boltzmann equation, Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 114047. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.114047

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.85.114047 2012

  2. [1]

    Cattaneo, Sulla Conduzione Del Calore, V ol

    C. Cattaneo, Sulla Conduzione Del Calore, V ol. 3, 1948. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-11051-1_5

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-11051-1_5 1948

  3. [2]

    Lichnerowicz, Relativistic Hydrodynamics and Magnetohydrodynamics: Lectures on the Existence of So- lutions, Mathematical physics monograph series, Benjamin, 1967

    A. Lichnerowicz, Relativistic Hydrodynamics and Magnetohydrodynamics: Lectures on the Existence of So- lutions, Mathematical physics monograph series, Benjamin, 1967. URL https://books.google.it/books?id=oqZAAAAAIAAJ

    1967

  4. [3]

    Eckart, The Thermodynamics of Irreversible Processes

    C. Eckart, The Thermodynamics of Irreversible Processes. III. Relativistic Theory of the Simple Fluid, Phys. Rev. 58 (1940) 919–924. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.58.919

    doi:10.1103/physrev.58.919 1940

  5. [4]

    Muller, Zum Paradoxon der Warmeleitungstheorie, Z

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

    1967

  6. [5]

    Landau, E

    L. Landau, E. Lifshitz, Fluid Mechanics, Elsevier Science, 1987. URL https://books.google.it/books?id=eVKbCgAAQBAJ

    1987

  7. [6]

    Israel, Nonstationary irreversible thermodynamics: A Causal relativistic theory, Annals Phys

    W. Israel, Nonstationary irreversible thermodynamics: A Causal relativistic theory, Annals Phys. 100 (1976) 310–331. doi:10.1016/0003-4916(76)90064-

    work page doi:10.1016/0003-4916(76)90064- 1976

  8. [7]

    Israel, J

    W. Israel, J. M. Stewart, On transient relativistic thermodynamics and kinetic theory. ii, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 365 (1720) (1979) 43–52. doi:10.1098/rspa.1979.0005

    arXiv 1979

Show all 113 references
  1. [8]

    S. R. De Groot, Relativistic Kinetic Theory. Principles and Applications, 1980

    1980

  2. [9]

    Rezzolla, O

    L. Rezzolla, O. Zanotti, Relativistic Hydrodynamics, Oxford University Press, 2013. URL https://books.google.de/books?id=aS1oAgAAQBAJ

    2013

  3. [10]

    Romatschke, U

    P. Romatschke, U. Romatschke, Relativistic Fluid Dynamics In and Out of Equilibrium: And Applications to Relativistic Nuclear Collisions, Cambridge University Press, 2019. doi:10.1017/9781108651998

    2019 doi

  4. [11]

    Florkowski, M

    W. Florkowski, M. P. Heller, M. Spali´nski, New theories of relativistic hydrodynamics in the LHC era, Reports on Progress in Physics 81 (4) (2018) 046001. doi:10.1088/1361-6633/aaa091

    2018 doi

  5. [12]

    Aidala, et al., Creation of quarkgluon plasma droplets with three distinct geometries, Nature Phys

    C. Aidala, et al., Creation of quarkgluon plasma droplets with three distinct geometries, Nature Phys. 15 (2019) 214–220. doi:10.1038/s41567-018-0360-0

    2019 doi

  6. [13]

    Lucas, K

    A. Lucas, K. C. Fong, Hydrodynamics of electrons in graphene, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 30 (2018) 053001. doi:10.1088/1361-648X/aaa274

    2018 doi

  7. [14]

    Maldacena, The large-n limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity, International Journal of Theoretical Physics 38 (4) (1999) 1113–1133

    J. Maldacena, The large-n limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity, International Journal of Theoretical Physics 38 (4) (1999) 1113–1133. doi:10.1023/A:102665431296

    1999 doi

  8. [15]

    J. L. Nagle, W. A. Zajc, Small system collectivity in relativistic hadronic and nuclear collisions, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science 68 (1) (2018) 211–235. doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-101916-123209

    2018 doi

  9. [16]

    Succi, Lattice boltzmann 2038, EPL (Europhysics Letters) 109 (2015) 50001

    S. Succi, Lattice boltzmann 2038, EPL (Europhysics Letters) 109 (2015) 50001. doi:10.1209/0295-5075/ 109/50001

    2015 doi

  10. [17]

    Succi, The Lattice Boltzmann Equation: For Complex States of Flowing Matter, OUP Oxford, 2018

    S. Succi, The Lattice Boltzmann Equation: For Complex States of Flowing Matter, OUP Oxford, 2018. doi: 10.1093/oso/9780199592357.001.0001

    2018

  11. [18]

    Mendoza, B

    M. Mendoza, B. M. Boghosian, H. J. Herrmann, S. Succi, Fast lattice boltzmann solver for relativistic hydro- dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 (2010) 014502. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.014502

    2010 doi

  12. [20]

    Huovinen, D

    P. Huovinen, D. Molnar, Applicability of causal dissipative hydrodynamics to relativistic heavy ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 79 (2009) 014906. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.79.014906

    2009 doi

  13. [21]

    Bouras, E

    I. Bouras, E. Moln ´ar, H. Niemi, Z. Xu, A. El, O. Fochler, C. Greiner, D. H. Rischke, Investigation of shock waves in the relativistic riemann problem: A comparison of viscous fluid dynamics to kinetic theory, Phys. Rev. C 82 (2010) 024910. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.82.024910

    2010 doi

  14. [22]

    Florkowski, R

    W. Florkowski, R. Ryblewski, M. Strickland, Testing viscous and anisotropic hydrodynamics in an exactly solvable case, Phys. Rev. C 88 (2013) 024903. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.88.024903

    2013 doi

  15. [23]

    Muronga, Relativistic dynamics of nonideal fluids: Viscous and heat-conducting fluids

    A. Muronga, Relativistic dynamics of nonideal fluids: Viscous and heat-conducting fluids. i. general aspects and 3 + 1 formulation for nuclear collisions, Phys. Rev. C 76 (2007) 014909. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.76. 014909. 90

    2007 doi

  16. [24]

    Muronga, Relativistic dynamics of non-ideal fluids: Viscous and heat-conducting fluids

    A. Muronga, Relativistic dynamics of non-ideal fluids: Viscous and heat-conducting fluids. ii. transport prop- erties and microscopic description of relativistic nuclear matter, Phys. Rev. C 76 (2007) 014910. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.76.014910

    2007 doi

  17. [25]

    B. Betz, D. Henkel, D. H. Rischke, Complete second-order dissipative fluid dynamics, Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics 36 (6) (2009) 064029. doi:10.1088/0954-3899/36/6/064029

    2009 doi

  18. [26]

    A. El, Z. Xu, C. Greiner, Extension of relativistic dissipative hydrodynamics to third order, Phys. Rev. C 81 (2010) 041901. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.81.041901

    2010 doi

  19. [27]

    G. S. Denicol, T. Koide, D. H. Rischke, Dissipative relativistic fluid dynamics: A new way to derive the equations of motion from kinetic theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 (2010) 162501. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 105.162501

    2010 doi

  20. [28]

    doi:10.1051/epjconf/20111307005

    Betz, B., Denicol, G.S., Koide, T., Moln ´ar, E., Niemi, H., Rischke, D.H., Second order dissipative fluid dynam- ics from kinetic theory, EPJ Web of Conferences 13 (2011) 07005. doi:10.1051/epjconf/20111307005

    2011

  21. [29]

    Jaiswal, R

    A. Jaiswal, R. S. Bhalerao, S. Pal, Complete relativistic second-order dissipative hydrodynamics from the entropy principle, Phys. Rev. C 87 (2013) 021901. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.87.021901

    2013 doi

  22. [30]

    Jaiswal, Relativistic dissipative hydrodynamics from kinetic theory with relaxation-time approximation, Phys

    A. Jaiswal, Relativistic dissipative hydrodynamics from kinetic theory with relaxation-time approximation, Phys. Rev. C 87 (2013) 051901. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.87.051901

    2013 doi

  23. [31]

    Jaiswal, Relativistic third-order dissipative fluid dynamics from kinetic theory, Phys

    A. Jaiswal, Relativistic third-order dissipative fluid dynamics from kinetic theory, Phys. Rev. C 88 (2013) 021903. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.88.021903

    2013 doi

  24. [32]

    R. S. Bhalerao, A. Jaiswal, S. Pal, V . Sreekanth, Particle production in relativistic heavy-ion collisions: A consistent hydrodynamic approach, Phys. Rev. C 88 (2013) 044911. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.88.044911

    2013 doi

  25. [33]

    R. S. Bhalerao, A. Jaiswal, S. Pal, V . Sreekanth, Relativistic viscous hydrodynamics for heavy-ion collisions: A comparison between the chapman-enskog and grad methods, Phys. Rev. C 89 (2014) 054903. doi:10. 1103/PhysRevC.89.054903

    2014

  26. [34]

    Chattopadhyay, A

    C. Chattopadhyay, A. Jaiswal, S. Pal, R. Ryblewski, Relativistic third-order viscous corrections to the entropy four-current from kinetic theory, Phys. Rev. C 91 (2015) 024917. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.91.024917

    2015 doi

  27. [35]

    Schwarz, The first second of the universe, Annalen der Physik 12 (4) (2003) 220–270

    D. Schwarz, The first second of the universe, Annalen der Physik 12 (4) (2003) 220–270. doi:10.1002/ andp.200310010

    2003

  28. [36]

    Mendoza, B

    M. Mendoza, B. M. Boghosian, H. J. Herrmann, S. Succi, Derivation of the lattice boltzmann model for relativistic hydrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 105008. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.105008

    2010 doi

  29. [37]

    Romatschke, M

    P. Romatschke, M. Mendoza, S. Succi, Fully relativistic lattice boltzmann algorithm, Phys. Rev. C 84 (2011) 034903. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.84.034903

    2011 doi

  30. [38]

    Romatschke, Relativistic (lattice) boltzmann equation with nonideal equation of state, Phys

    P. Romatschke, Relativistic (lattice) boltzmann equation with nonideal equation of state, Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 065012. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.065012

    2012 doi

  31. [39]

    Q. Li, K. H. Luo, X. J. Li, Lattice boltzmann method for relativistic hydrodynamics: Issues on conservation law of particle number and discontinuities, Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012) 085044. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86. 085044

    2012 doi

  32. [40]

    Mohseni, M

    F. Mohseni, M. Mendoza, S. Succi, H. J. Herrmann, Lattice boltzmann model for ultrarelativistic flows, Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) 083003. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.083003

    2013 doi

  33. [41]

    Mendoza, I

    M. Mendoza, I. Karlin, S. Succi, H. J. Herrmann, Relativistic lattice boltzmann model with improved dissipa- tion, Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) 065027. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.065027

    2013 doi

  34. [42]

    Gabbana, M

    A. Gabbana, M. Mendoza, S. Succi, R. Tripiccione, Towards a unified lattice kinetic scheme for relativistic hydrodynamics, Phys. Rev. E 95 (2017) 053304. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.95.053304

    2017 doi

  35. [43]

    V . E. Ambrus ¸, R. Blaga, High-order quadrature-based lattice boltzmann models for the flow of ultrarelativistic rarefied gases, Phys. Rev. C 98 (2018) 035201. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.98.035201

    2018 doi

  36. [44]

    D. Hupp, M. Mendoza, I. Bouras, S. Succi, H. J. Herrmann, Relativistic lattice boltzmann method for quark- gluon plasma simulations, Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011) 125015. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.125015

    2011 doi

  37. [45]

    Gabbana, M

    A. Gabbana, M. Mendoza, S. Succi, R. Tripiccione, Kinetic approach to relativistic dissipation, Phys. Rev. E 96 (2017) 023305. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.96.023305

    2017 doi

  38. [46]

    V . E. Ambrus ¸, C. Guga-Ros ¸ian, Lattice boltzmann study of the one-dimensional boost-invariant expansion with anisotropic initial conditions, AIP Conference Proceedings 2071 (1) (2019) 020014. doi:10.1063/1. 5090061. 91

    2019 doi

  39. [47]

    R. C. Coelho, M. Mendoza, M. M. Doria, H. J. Herrmann, Fully dissipative relativistic lattice boltzmann method in two dimensions, Computers & Fluids 172 (2018) 318 – 331. doi:10.1016/j.compfluid.2018. 04.023

    2018 doi

  40. [48]

    V . E. Ambrus ¸, Transport coefficients in ultrarelativistic kinetic theory, Phys. Rev. C 97 (2018) 024914. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.97.024914

    2018 doi

  41. [49]

    Gabbana, D

    A. Gabbana, D. Simeoni, S. Succi, R. Tripiccione, Relativistic dissipation obeys chapman-enskog asymptotics: Analytical and numerical evidence as a basis for accurate kinetic simulations, Phys. Rev. E 99 (2019) 052126. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.99.052126

    2019 doi

  42. [50]

    Oettinger, M

    D. Oettinger, M. Mendoza, H. J. Herrmann, Gaussian quadrature and lattice discretization of the Fermi-Dirac distribution for graphene, Phys. Rev. E 88 (2013) 013302. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.88.013302

    2013 doi

  43. [51]

    Furtmaier, M

    O. Furtmaier, M. Mendoza, I. Karlin, S. Succi, H. J. Herrmann, Rayleigh-B ´enard instability in graphene, Phys. Rev. B 91 (2015) 085401. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.91.085401

    2015 doi

  44. [52]

    R. C. V . Coelho, M. Mendoza, M. M. Doria, H. J. Herrmann, Kelvin-Helmholtz instability of the Dirac fluid of charge carriers on graphene, Phys. Rev. B 96 (2017) 184307. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.96.184307

    2017 doi

  45. [53]

    Gabbana, M

    A. Gabbana, M. Mendoza, S. Succi, R. Tripiccione, Numerical evidence of electron hydrodynamic whirlpools in graphene samples, Computers & Fluids 172 (2018) 644 – 650. doi:10.1016/j.compfluid.2018.02. 020

    2018 doi

  46. [54]

    Mendoza, H

    M. Mendoza, H. J. Herrmann, S. Succi, Preturbulent regimes in graphene flow, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011) 156601. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.156601

    2011 doi

  47. [55]

    Gabbana, M

    A. Gabbana, M. Polini, S. Succi, R. Tripiccione, F. M. D. Pellegrino, Prospects for the detection of electronic preturbulence in graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) 236602. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.236602

    2018 doi

  48. [56]

    Pasechnik, M

    R. Pasechnik, M. sumbera, Phenomenological review on quark-gluon plasma: Concepts vs. observations, Uni- verse 3 (1). doi:10.3390/universe3010007

    doi

  49. [57]

    Scardina, S

    F. Scardina, S. K. Das, V . Minissale, S. Plumari, V . Greco, Estimating the charm quark di ffusion coefficient and thermalization time from D meson spectra at energies available at the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider and the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. C C96 (4) (...

    2017 doi

  50. [58]

    Cercignani, G

    C. Cercignani, G. M. Kremer, The Relativistic Boltzmann Equation: Theory and Applications, Birkhuser Basel,

  51. [59]

    Anderson, H

    J. Anderson, H. Witting, A relativistic relaxation-time model for the boltzmann equation, Physica 74 (3) (1974) 466 – 488. doi:10.1016/0031-8914(74)90355-3

    1974 doi

  52. [60]

    Anderson, H

    J. Anderson, H. Witting, Relativistic quantum transport coe fficients, Physica 74 (3) (1974) 489 – 495. doi: 10.1016/0031-8914(74)90356-5

    1974 doi

  53. [61]

    Karsch, D

    F. Karsch, D. E. Miller, Exact equation of state for ideal relativistic quantum gases, Phys. Rev. A 22 (1980) 1210–1219. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.22.1210

    1980 doi

  54. [62]

    Grad, On the kinetic theory of rarefied gases, Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics 2 (4) (1949) 331–407

    H. Grad, On the kinetic theory of rarefied gases, Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics 2 (4) (1949) 331–407. doi:10.1002/cpa.3160020403

    1949 doi

  55. [63]

    Chapman, T

    S. Chapman, T. G. Cowling, The Mathematical Theory of Non-Uniform Gases, 3rd ed, Cambridge University Press, 197. doi:10.1119/1.1942035

    doi

  56. [64]

    Moln ´ar, H

    E. Moln ´ar, H. Niemi, G. S. Denicol, D. H. Rischke, Relative importance of second-order terms in relativistic dissipative fluid dynamics, Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014) 074010. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.074010

    2014 doi

  57. [65]

    Tsumura, T

    K. Tsumura, T. Kunihiro, Derivation of relativistic hydrodynamic equations consistent with relativistic Boltz- mann equation by renormalization-group method, The European Physical Journal A 48 (11) (2012) 162. doi:10.1140/epja/i2012-12162-x

    2012 doi

  58. [66]

    Mendoza, I

    M. Mendoza, I. Karlin, S. Succi, H. J. Herrmann, Ultrarelativistic transport coe fficients in two dimensions, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2013 (2013) P02036. doi:10.1088/1742-5468/ 2013/02/p02036

    2013 doi

  59. [68]

    Tsumura, Y

    K. Tsumura, Y . Kikuchi, T. Kunihiro, Relativistic causal hydrodynamics derived from boltzmann equation: A 92 novel reduction theoretical approach, Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 085048.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.085048

    2015 doi

  60. [69]

    Kikuchi, K

    Y . Kikuchi, K. Tsumura, T. Kunihiro, Derivation of second-order relativistic hydrodynamics for reactive mul- ticomponent systems, Phys. Rev. C 92 (2015) 064909. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.92.064909

    2015 doi

  61. [70]

    Kikuchi, K

    Y . Kikuchi, K. Tsumura, T. Kunihiro, Mesoscopic dynamics of fermionic cold atoms quantitative analysis of transport coefficients and relaxation times, Physics Letters A 380 (24) (2016) 2075 – 2080. doi:10.1016/j. physleta.2016.04.027

    2016 doi

  62. [71]

    A. L. Garc ´ıa-Perciante, A. R. M´endez, E. Escobar-Aguilar, Heat flux for a relativistic dilute bidimensional gas, Journal of Statistical Physics 167 (2017) 123–134. doi:10.1007/s10955-017-1742-x

    2017 doi

  63. [72]

    F. J. Higuera, S. Succi, R. Benzi, Lattice gas dynamics with enhanced collisions, EPL (Europhysics Letters) 9 (1989) 345. doi:10.1209/0295-5075/9/4/008

    1989 doi

  64. [73]

    He, L.-S

    X. He, L.-S. Luo, Theory of the lattice boltzmann method: From the boltzmann equation to the lattice boltz- mann equation, Phys. Rev. E 56 (1997) 6811–6817. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.56.6811

    1997 doi

  65. [74]

    X. Shan, X. He, Discretization of the velocity space in the solution of the boltzmann equation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80 (1998) 65–68. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.65

    1998 doi

  66. [75]

    N. S. Martys, X. Shan, H. Chen, Evaluation of the external force term in the discrete boltzmann equation, Phys. Rev. E 58 (1998) 6855–6857. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.58.6855

    1998 doi

  67. [76]

    doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2020.03.004

    See supplemental material at. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2020.03.004

    2020 doi

  68. [77]

    P. C. Philippi, L. A. Hegele, L. O. E. dos Santos, R. Surmas, From the continuous to the lattice boltzmann equation: The discretization problem and thermal models, Phys. Rev. E 73 (2006) 056702. doi:10.1103/ PhysRevE.73.056702

    2006

  69. [78]

    Shan, General solution of lattices for cartesian lattice bhatanagar-gross-krook models, Phys

    X. Shan, General solution of lattices for cartesian lattice bhatanagar-gross-krook models, Phys. Rev. E 81 (2010) 036702. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.81.036702

    2010 doi

  70. [79]

    Shan, The mathematical structure of the lattices of the lattice boltzmann method, Journal of Computational Science 17 (2016) 475 – 481

    X. Shan, The mathematical structure of the lattices of the lattice boltzmann method, Journal of Computational Science 17 (2016) 475 – 481. doi:10.1016/j.jocs.2016.03.002

    2016 doi

  71. [80]

    Blaga, V

    R. Blaga, V . E. Ambrus ¸, Quadrature-based lattice Boltzmann model for relativistic flows, AIP Conference Proceedings 1796 (2017) 020010. doi:10.1063/1.4972358

    2017 doi

  72. [81]

    Shan, X.-F

    X. Shan, X.-F. Yuan, H. Chen, Kinetic theory representation of hydrodynamics: a way beyond the navierstokes equation, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 550 (2006) 413–441. doi:10.1017/S0022112005008153

    2006 doi

  73. [82]

    X. Shan, H. Chen, Lattice boltzmann model for simulating flows with multiple phases and components, Phys. Rev. E 47 (1993) 1815–1819. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.47.1815

    1993 doi

  74. [83]

    X. Shan, H. Chen, Simulation of nonideal gases and liquid-gas phase transitions by the lattice boltzmann equation, Phys. Rev. E 49 (1994) 2941–2948. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.49.2941

    1994 doi

  75. [84]

    Z. Guo, C. Zheng, B. Shi, Discrete lattice e ffects on the forcing term in the lattice boltzmann method, Phys. Rev. E 65 (2002) 046308. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.65.046308

    2002 doi

  76. [85]

    Sbragaglia, R

    M. Sbragaglia, R. Benzi, L. Biferale, H. Chen, X. Shan, S. Succi, Lattice boltzmann method with self- consistent thermo-hydrodynamic equilibria, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 628 (2009) 299309. doi:10.1017/ S002211200900665X

    2009

  77. [86]

    Succi, G

    S. Succi, G. Amati, M. Bernaschi, G. Falcucci, M. Lauricella, A. Montessori, Towards exascale lattice boltz- mann computing, Computers & Fluids 181 (2019) 107 – 115. doi:10.1016/j.compfluid.2019.01.005

    2019 doi

  78. [87]

    A. G. Shet, S. H. Sorathiya, S. Krithivasan, A. M. Deshpande, B. Kaul, S. D. Sherlekar, S. Ansumali, Data struc- ture and movement for lattice-based simulations, Phys. Rev. E 88 (2013) 013314. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE. 88.013314

    2013 doi

  79. [88]

    A. G. Shet, S. H. Sorathiya, S. Krithivasan, A. M. Deshpande, B. Kaul, S. D. Sherlekar, S. Ansumali, On vectorization for lattice based simulations, International Journal of Modern Physics C 24 (12) (2013) 1340011. doi:10.1142/S0129183113400111

    2013 doi

  80. [89]

    Calore, A

    E. Calore, A. Gabbana, S. Schifano, R. Tripiccione, Optimization of lattice boltzmann simulations on hetero- geneous computers, The International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications 33 (1) (2019) 124–139. doi:10.1177/1094342017703771

    2019 doi

  81. [90]

    Gabbana, D

    A. Gabbana, D. Simeoni, S. Succi, T. R., Probing bulk viscosity in relativistic flows doi:arXiv:1910.04275

    1910 arXiv

  82. [91]

    G. I. Taylor, A. E. Green, Mechanism of the Production of Small Eddies from Large Ones, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 158 (895) (1937) 499–521. 93 doi:10.1098/rspa.1937.0036

    1937

  83. [92]

    Greif, I

    M. Greif, I. Bouras, C. Greiner, Z. Xu, Electric conductivity of the quark-gluon plasma investigated using a perturbative qcd based parton cascade, Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 094014. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90. 094014

    2014 doi

  84. [93]

    A. A. Mohamad, S. Succi, A note on equilibrium boundary conditions in lattice boltzmann fluid dynamic simulations, The European Physical Journal Special Topics 171 (1) (2009) 213–221. doi:10.1140/epjst/ e2009-01031-9

    2009 doi

  85. [94]

    G. A. Sod, A survey of several finite difference methods for systems of nonlinear hyperbolic conservation laws, Journal of Computational Physics 27 (1978) 1–31. doi:10.1016/0021-9991(78)90023-2

    1978 doi

  86. [95]

    K. W. Thompson, The special relativistic shock tube, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 171 (1986) 365–375. doi: 10.1017/S0022112086001489

    1986 doi

  87. [96]

    Z. Xu, C. Greiner, Transport rates and momentum isotropization of gluon matter in ultrarelativistic heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 76 (2007) 024911. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.76.024911

    2007 doi

  88. [97]

    Bouras, E

    I. Bouras, E. Moln ´ar, H. Niemi, Z. Xu, A. El, O. Fochler, C. Greiner, D. H. Rischke, Relativistic shock waves in viscous gluon matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103 (2009) 032301. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.032301

    2009 doi

  89. [98]

    A. El, A. Muronga, Z. Xu, C. Greiner, Shear viscosity and out of equilibrium dynamics, Phys. Rev. C 79 (2009) 044914. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.79.044914

    2009 doi

  90. [99]

    Plumari, A

    S. Plumari, A. Puglisi, F. Scardina, V . Greco, Shear viscosity of a strongly interacting system: Green-kubo correlator versus chapman-enskog and relaxation-time approximations, Phys. Rev. C 86 (2012) 054902. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.86.054902

    2012 doi

  91. [100]

    Ruggieri, F

    M. Ruggieri, F. Scardina, S. Plumari, V . Greco, Elliptic flow from non-equilibrium initial condition with a saturation scale, Physics Letters B 727 (1) (2013) 177 – 181. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2013.10.014

    2013 doi

  92. [101]

    Plumari, G

    S. Plumari, G. L. Guardo, F. Scardina, V . Greco, Initial-state fluctuations from midperipheral to ultracentral collisions in an event-by-event transport approach, Phys. Rev. C 92 (2015) 054902.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC. 92.054902

    2015 doi

  93. [102]

    S. Plumari, Anisotropic flows and the shear viscosity of the qgp within an event-by-event massive parton trans- port approach, The European Physical Journal C 79 (1) (2019) 2.doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-6510-9

    2019 doi

  94. [103]

    Florkowski, B

    W. Florkowski, B. Friman, A. Jaiswal, R. Ryblewski, E. Speranza, Relativistic fluid dynamics of spin-polarized systems of particles (January). arXiv:1901.00352

    1901 arXiv

  95. [104]

    Torre, A

    I. Torre, A. Tomadin, A. K. Geim, M. Polini, Nonlocal transport and the hydrodynamic shear viscosity in graphene, Phys. Rev. B 92 (2015) 165433. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.92.165433

    2015 doi

  96. [105]

    F. M. D. Pellegrino, I. Torre, A. K. Geim, M. Polini, Electron hydrodynamics dilemma: Whirlpools or no whirlpools, Phys. Rev. B 94 (2016) 155414. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.94.155414

    2016 doi

  97. [106]

    A. I. Berdyugin, S. G. Xu, F. M. D. Pellegrino, R. Krishna Kumar, A. Principi, I. Torre, M. Ben Shalom, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, I. V . Grigorieva, M. Polini, A. K. Geim, D. A. Bandurin, Measuring hall viscosity of graphene’s electron fluid, Science 364 (2019) 162–165. doi:10...

    2019 doi

  98. [107]

    Tomadin, M

    A. Tomadin, M. Polini, Theory of the plasma-wave photoresponse of a gated graphene sheet, Phys. Rev. B 88 (2013) 205426. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.88.205426

    2013 doi

  99. [108]

    D. A. Bandurin, I. Torre, R. K. Kumar, M. Ben Shalom, A. Tomadin, A. Principi, G. H. Auton, E. Khestanova, K. S. Novoselov, I. V . Grigorieva, L. A. Ponomarenko, A. K. Geim, M. Polini, Negative local resistance caused by viscous electron backflow in graphene, Science 351 (6277)...

    2016 doi

  100. [109]

    Krishna Kumar, D

    R. Krishna Kumar, D. A. Bandurin, F. Pellegrino, Y . Cao, A. Principi, H. Guo, G. Auton, M. Ben Shalom, L. A. Ponomarenko, G. Falkovich, I. Grigorieva, L. S. Levitov, M. Polini, A. K. Geim, Super-ballistic flow of viscous electron fluid through graphene constrictions, Nature Phy...

    doi

  101. [110]

    D. A. Bandurin, A. V . Shytov, L. S. Levitov, R. K. Kumar, A. I. Berdyugin, M. B. Shalom, I. V . Grigorieva, A. K. Geim, G. Falkovich, Fluidity onset in graphene, V ol. 9, 2018.doi:10.1038/s41467-018-07004-4

    2018 doi

  102. [111]

    Abramowitz, I

    M. Abramowitz, I. A. Stegun, D. Miller, Handbook of mathematical functions with formulas, graphs and math- ematical tables (national bureau of standards applied mathematics series no. 55), Journal of Applied Mechanics 32 (1965) 239. doi:10.1115/1.3625776

    1965 doi

  103. [112]

    A. H. Taub, Relativistic rankine-hugoniot equations, Phys. Rev. 74 (1948) 328–334. doi:10.1103/PhysRev. 94 74.328

    1948 doi

  104. [113]

    Grosswald, Bessel Polynomials (Lecture Notes in Mathematics), Springer, 1979

    E. Grosswald, Bessel Polynomials (Lecture Notes in Mathematics), Springer, 1979. doi:10.1007/ BFB0063135. 95

    1979

  105. [2002]

    doi:10.1007/978-3-0348-8165-4

    doi

Pith tools

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