Quantum Vortices in a Boundary Layer: New Results and Perspectives

Sergei V. Talalov

REVIEW 6 major objections 4 minor 17 references

Quantum Vortices in a Boundary Layer: New Results and Perspectives

T0 review · 6 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A circular quantum vortex moving near a flat wall has energy that depends on the fluid flow speed; in sufficiently fast flows the same vortex can act as a quasiparticle with negative effective mass.

desk verdict The central spectral calculation is broken by a missing imaginary unit in Eq. (19), so the flow-dependent spectrum and the energy formula built on it don't follow as written; the underlying idea is worth attention but the paper needs a fix before it's reviewable. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.02057 v1 pith:J66VK4SZ submitted 2026-08-03 math-ph math.MPphysics.flu-dynquant-ph

Sergei V. Talalov This is my paper · ORCID

classification math-phmath.MPphysics.flu-dynquant-ph MSC 81Q1076B4781R05 PACS 47.10.Df47.32.C

keywords quantumvorticesboundarylayernegativeeffectivemassvortexringquantizationself-adjointextensioninversetensorcirculationlocalinductionapproximation

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper constructs a quantum model of a thin circular vortex filament that moves parallel to an infinite flat surface while the surrounding fluid flows along that surface. It derives an explicit formula for the vortex energy as a function of the vortex momentum and the flow momentum, using the author's earlier method of quantizing closed vortex filaments as dynamical systems rather than topological defects. The central claim is that the energy contains a square root of the difference between vortex momentum and flow momentum; below a threshold the energy is imaginary and no persistent vortex state exists, while above a critical flow speed the energy surface develops two stationary points, one with positive and one with negative effective mass. If correct, this gives a mechanism for vortex accumulation in boundary layers and a natural route from a single quantum vortex to a model of turbulent and superfluid regimes.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a quantization scheme in which the classical LIA vortex ring is re-expressed in independent Hamiltonian variables: the ring center momentum p and position q, plus oscillator variables χ and ω describing radius oscillations and core motion. Quantization gives a Hilbert space L²(R²) × L²(R¹) ⊗ harmonic oscillator. The wall enters through a self-adjoint extension of −ħ² d²/dq3², written formally as a delta potential λδ(q3), whose bound state (18) supplies both the near-surface localization and the energy gap βλ. The decisive identity is the circulation quantization condition (16), which turns the condition that (p − pv)² is real into the threshold for vortex existence

What would settle it

Measure the onset of vortex formation near a flat wall as a function of flow velocity and direction: the model predicts a forbidden disc |p − M_eff v|² ≤ 2µ0|Eλ| inside which no persistent vortices form. Observing vortices inside this disc, or finding no stationary energy points M± as v grows, would falsify the central energy formula.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the real-time energy of a quantized circular vortex ring near a no-penetration wall is En(p; pv) = t0 |Γλ(p,pv;n)| / (4π R_n^2) E#_n(p), with dimensionless form Eq. (30). Here R_n is the quantized ring radius, E#_n(p) is a 'conditional' energy from the oscillator-plus-particle spectrum, and the circulation Γλ itself depends on p − pv through the square root in Eq. (21). That square root makes the energy real only when |p − pv| exceeds a wall-dependent gap; otherwise the mode decays exponentially with a lifetime T_n. The paper further claims that the inverse effective mass tensor M_eff^{-1} = ∂²E/∂p_i∂p_j is flow dependent and has off-diagonal elements, and that above a

Load-bearing premise

The model's near-wall physics rests on replacing the hard planar wall by a delta-function potential whose strength λ is a free parameter; if that wall model fails, the localizing bound state and the entire flow-dependent spectrum collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In a slowly moving or nearly stagnant fluid, no real vortex state appears near the wall; the flow in the boundary layer remains laminar.
Above a critical flow speed, stationary vortex states appear, and one of them has negative effective mass—so vortices can behave as quasiparticles with inverted dispersion.
The inverse mass tensor has off-diagonal entries, so the vortex acceleration is not generally aligned with the flow or the momentum.
The bound state in the wall direction implies a higher probability of finding vortices close to the surface, giving a quantum reason for boundary-layer vortex accumulation.
For a collection of weakly interacting such vortices with Bose statistics, the total Hamiltonian is self-adjoint, and the transition to turbulence need not involve a discontinuous energy jump.

Reading between the lines

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

If the threshold is real, it should be visible as a sharp onset of vortex generation as free-stream velocity increases; the model specifically predicts the condition is |p − M_eff v|² > 2µ0|Eλ|, not simply v > v_c, so experiments that vary angle and speed of the flow could isolate the gap.
The wall parameter λ is left free; fitting it to measured vortex-formation thresholds or to surface-roughness statistics would convert the mechanism into a quantitative boundary-layer model.
The author hints that the negative-mass state could simulate superfluidity in turbulent media but does not construct the superfluid order parameter; building that link is a natural next step beyond the paper.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The short version: there's a genuine idea here—quantizing a circular vortex ring near a wall with background flow and deriving a flow-dependent circulation spectrum plus a tensorial effective mass—but the central operator in Eq. (19) is not self-adjoint as written. The minimal-coupling terms are missing the imaginary unit, and when applied to the paper's own plane-wave states the cross-term is imaginary. So the circulation formula (21) and energy formula (30) don't come out as real expressions. This is the load-bearing step, not a typo you can wave away.

What's actually new: the boundary-layer setup with v parallel to the surface, the flow-dependent circulation spectrum with a threshold for vortex formation, and the negative effective mass at the M− point. The paper is clearly written and honest about what it does and doesn't explain. The author explicitly notes that the wall model is a free parametrization rather than a derivation from hydrodynamics, which is good practice.

The soft spots are proportional to the central flaw. The missing i is fatal as written; a fix is possible but requires redoing the sign conventions and the phase factor (the wavefunction phase is written with ħ², dimensionally wrong). Beyond that, the delta-potential strength λ and the core-flow frequency ω are free parameters, and the vortex-formation threshold and all figures depend on them. The multi-vortex self-adjointness claim in Sec. 6 also looks shaky, because the single-vortex Hamiltonian has complex eigenvalues in the domain D00, so the spectral theorem isn't obviously available to define H(λ,ω).

Who is this for? Readers following the author's nonstandard vortex quantization program, or people interested in quantum boundary-layer models. A careful reader might see how to repair the construction, but as a submission it is not ready.

Recommendation: I would not send this to referees as it stands. Send it back to the author with the specific request to fix the spectral problem first. If it gets resubmitted with a correct self-adjoint operator, it deserves a serious look.

Referee Report

6 major / 4 minor

Summary. This manuscript proposes a quantum-mechanical model of a thin circular vortex filament near an infinite planar surface in a parallel background flow. The quantization follows the author's earlier group-theoretic approach: the vortex ring is represented as a particle with internal oscillator degrees of freedom, the wall is modeled by a δ-potential self-adjoint extension, the circulation is obtained from a spectral constraint, and the physical energy is obtained by rescaling the 'conditional-time' energy with the circulation. The main results are the circulation formula Eq. (21) and the dimensionless energy function Eq. (30), from which the paper claims an off-diagonal inverse effective mass tensor, positive and negative effective masses at points M±, and a flow-velocity threshold for the appearance of stationary vortex states near the wall. The manuscript also sketches a many-vortex Bose system for boundary-layer turbulence.

Significance. If the derivation were correct, the model would offer a new flow-dependent quantum vortex energy spectrum and a mechanism for vortex formation near walls. The paper is explicit in its definitions, and the final energy expression is simple enough to be tested or falsified. However, the central operator in the spectral problem is written incorrectly, the wall model is internally inconsistent with the stated impenetrability condition, and the many-vortex Hamiltonian is claimed to be self-adjoint despite imaginary-energy sectors. These issues are load-bearing rather than cosmetic. The paper also introduces several free parameters (λ, ω, σ_ph, R_f) without a direct derivation from hydrodynamics, so the quantitative predictions are conditional.

major comments (6)

[§3, Eqs. (19)-(21) and (20)] The minimal-coupling operator in Eq. (19) is non-Hermitian as printed: it contains -ℏ²(∂_i-(kv)_i)² with no imaginary unit, while the plane-wave factor in Eq. (20) is written with exponent -i(p_1q_1+p_2q_2)/ℏ². Acting on the stated eigenfunction (even after repairing the dimension of the phase to e^{-ip_iq_i/ℏ}), the transverse part yields a complex eigenvalue p_i² - 2i p_i p_{vi} - p_{vi}², not the real (p_i-p_{vi})². Consequently the square root in Eq. (21), and hence the circulation spectrum, do not follow from the stated operator. To obtain (κ-κ_v)² one needs -ℏ²(∂_i+i(kv)_i)² with the plane-wave phase e^{-ip_iq_i/ℏ}; this convention must be stated explicitly. As written, the central spectral problem is not solved by the provided wavefunction, and the energy formula Eq. (30) inherits the error.
[§3, Eqs. (17) and (26)] There is a sign inconsistency in the conditional Hamiltonian. Eq. (17) defines Ȟ# = -p̂²/(2μ_0) + (ℏω/t_0)(b†b+1/2), but Eq. (26) gives E#_n(p) = (p_1²+p_2²)/(2μ_0) + E_λ + ℏω/t_0(n+1/2). If p̂² is the standard positive Laplacian operator with eigenvalues p², then -p̂²/(2μ_0) has negative eigenvalues. If a different quantization convention is intended, it is not described. The sign of the kinetic term affects the bracket in Eq. (30) and therefore the predicted existence of stable minima and of negative-energy states.
[§3, Eqs. (13) and (18); §4] The wall model is internally inconsistent with the stated boundary condition. Eq. (13) imposes Ψ(0)=0 for an 'impenetrable' surface, but the δ-potential self-adjoint extension produces the bound state Ψ_λ(q_3) in Eq. (18), which is nonzero at q_3=0 and extends into both half-spaces. The localization near the surface is therefore not a consequence of an impenetrable boundary; it is inserted by choosing a particular δ-potential strength λ, a free parameter. No hydrodynamic or microscopic derivation of λ is given. This undermines the central boundary-layer claim: the vortex is localized at the wall by construction, not by the boundary-layer physics the paper seeks to explain.
[§4, Eqs. (27)-(29); §6] The conversion from conditional time to physical time via t = 4πR²/(t_0|Γ|) t# relies on a new postulate: invariance of transition probabilities under this rescaling. The physical energy Eq. (29) is then proportional to |Γ|, which is itself an output of the spectral problem. This step is not derived from the LIA or from standard quantum mechanics. If the rescaling is not justified, the flow dependence of the spectrum—the paper's central result—does not follow.
[§4 and §6, imaginary-energy sector and self-adjointness] In §4 the paper states that for (κ_1,κ_2) in the domain D_00 the energy is imaginary, E_n = iℏ/T_n, leading to exponential decay of the mode. In §6, however, the many-vortex Hamiltonian Ȟ_v is built from E_n via the spectral theorem and is declared self-adjoint. These two claims are incompatible: a self-adjoint operator cannot have imaginary eigenvalues. The spectral integral in §6 must be restricted to the real-energy branches, or the dissipative imaginary sector must be inserted through a separate non-Hermitian term. As written, the multi-vortex extension is not well defined.
[§5, Eq. (31) and Figs. 1-4] The critical value κ_cr and the planar point κ_0 are never computed. Eq. (31) is only a defining criterion (vanishing Hessian), and the existence of the stationary points M± and their appearance above a threshold is inferred from a few figures generated with one choice of parameters. Since the energy function Eq. (30) is explicit, an analytic or numerical derivation of κ_cr as a function of the model parameters should be supplied. Without this, the claimed flow-velocity threshold for vortex formation is not demonstrated.

minor comments (4)

[Abstract/§1] The text contains several typos: 'Lee algebra' should be 'Lie algebra'; 'Sinse' in §6 should be 'Since'; reference [10] has 'Gydrodynamics' for 'Hydrodynamics'.
[Eq. (20)] The plane-wave exponent is written with denominator ℏ²; for dimensional consistency it should be ℏ. This is related to the operator convention issue but should be corrected in any revision.
[Figures 1-4] The figures use labels such as 'ħ 00' and 'ħ neg' that appear to be TeX artifacts; the notation should be D_00 and D_neg consistently. The parameter values used for the figures are given only in the appendix; a sensitivity statement would help the reader judge the robustness of the qualitative conclusions.
[§6] The multi-vortex Hamiltonian has a typesetting artifact with the tensor-product overbrace/underbrace, making the definition hard to read. Also, the claim that the λ_k and ω_k model surface irregularities is stated without a quantitative model.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Partially circular: the near-surface localization is built into the delta-potential wall model, and the quantization framework is imported from the author's own prior papers; the energy/mass algebra itself is otherwise self-contained.

self definitional [Section 3, Eqs. (13)-(20); Section 4, first paragraph]
"Thus, we achieved one of our goals in this study: the vectors (20) visually demonstrate that the vortex in question is located near the Z=0 surface."

The wall is implemented as a self-adjoint extension of -ℏ²∂²/∂q3² whose bound state is Ψλ(q3)=exp[-√(-2μ0Eλ)q3/ℏ] for q3>0. That wavefunction is exponentially localized by construction. The paper then presents this localization as a derived outcome ('one of our goals'), but it is an input chosen through the attractive δ-potential/negative Eλ. The claimed boundary-layer concentration is therefore equivalent to the model's own definition of the wall, not an independent prediction.
self citation load bearing [Abstract and Section 1, first paragraph]
"This study employs a novel quantization method for classical closed vortex filaments, developed by the author earlier. The suggested model is based on the new approach developed earlier by the author for vortex quantization [5, 6]."

The paper's central premise—that vortices are quantized classical dynamical systems rather than topological defects, with a wider circulation spectrum than Γ=ℏn/μH—is justified almost entirely by reference to the author's own earlier papers [5,6]. No independent, machine-checked, or externally falsifiable derivation of this non-standard quantization framework is provided here. Since the subsequent energy formula Eq. (30) and the effective-mass analysis inherit this framework, the load-bearing foundation of the paper rests on author self-citation. The new boundary-layer application has independent content, but the foundational quantization step is not independently established.

full rationale

The energy formula Eq. (30) and the circulation spectrum Eq. (21) are derived algebraically from the paper's spectral problems, so that portion is not circular merely because it contains free parameters ω, βλ, and σ_ph; parameter dependence is a normal feature of a model. The two genuine circularity indicators are (1) the 'near-surface' conclusion is built into the wall model: the impenetrable plane is replaced by a δ-potential/self-adjoint extension whose only bound state is exponentially localized, and the paper then reports this localization as an achieved goal; and (2) the non-standard quantization method is imported from the author's own prior papers [5,6] and is load-bearing for the whole approach. There is also a serious mathematical gap in Eq. (19): the minimal-coupling terms are written without the imaginary unit, so the stated plane-wave eigenfunctions give complex transverse eigenvalues and the real square-root spectrum in Eq. (21) does not follow as written. That is a correctness defect rather than a circularity, so it does not by itself raise the circularity score, but it compounds the fragility of the central derivation. Overall, the paper is partially circular: the boundary-layer prediction collapses to the defining ansatz, and the quantization framework is supported by self-citation, while the energy/mass algebra has some independent mathematical content.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The model depends on multiple hand-chosen parameters (lambda, omega, sigma_ph) and on postulates from the author's earlier quantization framework. The central boundary-layer result is effectively built into the delta-potential assumption, and the energy spectrum inherits the free parameters, so the ledger contains more ad hoc content than derived content.

free parameters (3)

lambda / beta_lambda = beta_lambda = 2e-5 (Figs 1-2), 3e-5 (Figs 3-4)
Self-adjoint extension strength of the wall delta-potential; freely chosen to generate the bound state and the plotted energy levels. Controls the vortex-formation threshold.
omega = omega = 1e-4 (Figs 1-2), 14e-6 (Figs 3-4)
Dimensionless core-flow frequency in the LIA equation and in the oscillator term of the Hamiltonian. Chosen by hand for the figures and directly enters the energy spectrum.
sigma_ph = sigma_ph^2 = 1e-6
Quantization scale sqrt(hbar/(E0 t0)); the underlying constants Rf, v0, mu0 are unspecified, so this acts as an effective free scale in the spectrum.

assumptions (8)

domain assumption LIA equation with core-flow term (Eq. 3)
The classical vortex motion is assumed to obey Local Induction Approximation with an additional omega term describing flow in the core; cited to [2, 9] but accepted without derivation.
ad hoc to paper Centrally extended Galilean group with central charge mu0 and internal energy Casimir (Eq. 1)
The group-theoretic vortex quantization framework is taken from the author's earlier papers [5, 6] as a postulate; no proof or independent derivation is given here.
domain assumption Canonical momentum formula p = pv + (rho0/2) integral r x w dV (Eq. 5)
Standard formula for vortex momentum with background flow; cited to [10, 11] and accepted as conventional.
ad hoc to paper Set of fundamental variables A' = {p, q; omega, chi} (Eq. 9)
The replacement of Gamma, b, R, phi by momentum and oscillator variables is a modeling postulate, not derived from the equations of motion.
ad hoc to paper Hamiltonian H = p^2/(2 mu0) + E0 omega (omega^2 + chi^2)/2 (Eq. 11)
The free-particle plus harmonic-oscillator Hamiltonian is assumed, guided by Eq. (1) but not derived from a Lagrangian or hydrodynamic energy.
ad hoc to paper Wall represented by delta-potential self-adjoint extension (Eqs. 13-20)
The impenetrable surface is replaced by a lambda delta(q3) interaction with free strength lambda; the bound state Psi_lambda then localizes vortices near the wall by construction.
ad hoc to paper Time-reparametrization invariance of probabilities with t = 4 pi R^2 / (t0 |Gamma|) t# (Eq. 27)
The key assumption that probabilities are independent of the LIA evolution parameter is stated without proof and is load-bearing for defining the 'real' energy En.
domain assumption Bose statistics and non-interacting vortices for the multi-vortex Hamiltonian
The K-vortex system assumes symmetric tensor product and negligible interactions, a gross simplification for a turbulent boundary layer.

invented entities (3)

delta(q3) wall potential with bound state Psi_lambda
purpose: Confines the quantum vortex near the plane and produces the boundary-layer localization
The delta interaction with strength lambda is a modeling device, not derived from fluid dynamics or surface physics; the localization is an input, not a result.
Vortex quasi-particle with negative effective mass at M-
purpose: Purported to simulate superfluidity in quantum turbulent media
The negative-mass state is a feature of the constructed energy surface with no external falsifiable handle given in the paper.
Vortex lifetime Tn from imaginary-energy modes
purpose: Interprets unstable modes as exponentially decaying vortices
The imaginary-energy interpretation is introduced ad hoc and is not connected to measured lifetimes or a dissipative mechanism.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum Vortices in a Boundary Layer: New Results and Perspectives." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/J66VK4SZ

@misc{pith2026260802057,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum Vortices in a Boundary Layer: New Results and Perspectives},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/J66VK4SZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.02057}
}

abstract

Here, we investigate the motion of a thin circular quantum vortex filament near the infinite planar surface. The fluid surrounding this surface moves with a non-zero velocity $\bf{v}$, which is parallel to the surface. We study the specific features of this quantum system and show that they are quite suitable for the boundary layer theory. The developed model allows us to calculate the vortex energy spectrum, $E = E({\bf p})$, where ${\bf p}$ is the total momentum of a vortex ring. We have demonstrated that this function has complex non-trivial dependence on the velocity $\bf{v}$. It is stated that the inverse effective mass of a vortex under consideration is of a tensorial nature. In certain quantum states, the system shows the possibility of both negative and positive effective mass existing. This study employs a novel quantization method for classical closed vortex filaments, developed by the author earlier.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.02057 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Energy levels for (κv)1 = 250, (κv)2 = 70. What happens when En(κ; κv) > 0 in the case of small value of |κv|? To find out, let us view a simple formula ∂E ∂t = ∂E ∂p1 p˙1 + ∂E ∂p2 p˙2 , p˙i ≡ dpi dt . Still, we consider the integrable Hamiltonian system (3), so that the equalities ˙pi = 0 hold. But really, in many vortex systems, we must consider the various interactions between vortices. In this scenario, ˙pi gen… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Domain’s boundaries for (κv)1 = 3, (κv)2 = 1. − − pp − − [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

17 extracted references

[1]

Schlichting

H. Schlichting. Grenzschicht-Theorie. Verlad G. Braun , Karlsruhe (1951)

1951
[2]

Saﬀman, Vortex dynamics

P.G. Saﬀman, Vortex dynamics. Cambrige Univ. Press, (1992)

1992
[3]

Lomov, I.S

S.A. Lomov, I.S. Lomov. Osnovy matematicheskoi teorii pogranichnogo sloya (The foundations of the mathematical theory of a bound ary layer) Moscow: Moscow State University Press. (2011). In Russian, ISBN 978- 5-211-05843-9

2011
[4]

G. W. Stagg, N. G. Parker, and C. F. Barenghi // Phys. Rev. L ett. 118, 135301 (2017)

2017
[5]

Talalov // Chaos, Solitons and Fractals

S.V. Talalov // Chaos, Solitons and Fractals. 185. 115097. (2024)

2024
[6]

Talalov // Chaos, Solitons and Fractals

S.V. Talalov // Chaos, Solitons and Fractals. 196. 116394. (2025)

2025
[7]

R.J. Donnely. Quantum Vortices in Helium II Cambrige Univ. Press. (1991)

1991
[8]

Talalov // Chaos, Solitons and Fractals

S.V. Talalov // Chaos, Solitons and Fractals. 202. 117582. (2026)

2026

Show all 17 references

[9]

Alekseenko, P.A

S.V. Alekseenko, P.A. Kuibin, V.L. Okulov, Theory of concentrated vor- tices. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg (2007)

2007
[10]

Nemirovskii

S.K. Nemirovskii. Gydrodynamics of quantum ﬂuids. Wav es, vortices, turbulence. Part II. Quantum vortices, superﬂuid turbulen ce. Novosi- birsk: Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences (2 016) In Russian, ISBN 978-5-7692-1482-0
[11]

Batchelor, An Introducton to Fluid Dynamics

G.K. Batchelor, An Introducton to Fluid Dynamics. Cambrige Univ. Press. (1970)

1970
[12]

M. Reed, B. Simon. Methods of Modern Mathematical Physi cs. V.2. Fourier Analysis, Self-Ajointness. Academic Press: New Yo rk London (1975)

1975
[13]

Filatova, A.I

T.A. Filatova, A.I. Shafarevich // Theor. Math. Phys. 164. Issue 2. pp. 1081 - 1088 (2010)

2010
[14]

Berezin, L.D

F.A. Berezin, L.D. Faddeev // Sov. Sci. Doklady. 137, No 5, 1011 (in Russian, 1961)

1961
[15]

Yu. M. Shirokov // Theor. Math. Phys. 41. pp. 1031 - 1038 (1979). 22

1979
[16]

Berezin, M.A

F.A. Berezin, M.A. Shubin, The Schr¨ odinger Equation. Kluwer Aca- demic Publisher, Netherlands. (1991)

1991
[17]

Tennekes

H. Tennekes. in book: Handbook of Turbulence. ed. by W. F rost and T.H. Moulden. Plenum press, N.Y. (1977). 23

1977

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Schlichting

H. Schlichting. Grenzschicht-Theorie. Verlad G. Braun , Karlsruhe (1951)

1951

[2] [2]

Saﬀman, Vortex dynamics

P.G. Saﬀman, Vortex dynamics. Cambrige Univ. Press, (1992)

1992

[3] [3]

Lomov, I.S

S.A. Lomov, I.S. Lomov. Osnovy matematicheskoi teorii pogranichnogo sloya (The foundations of the mathematical theory of a bound ary layer) Moscow: Moscow State University Press. (2011). In Russian, ISBN 978- 5-211-05843-9

2011

[4] [4]

G. W. Stagg, N. G. Parker, and C. F. Barenghi // Phys. Rev. L ett. 118, 135301 (2017)

2017

[5] [5]

Talalov // Chaos, Solitons and Fractals

S.V. Talalov // Chaos, Solitons and Fractals. 185. 115097. (2024)

2024

[6] [6]

Talalov // Chaos, Solitons and Fractals

S.V. Talalov // Chaos, Solitons and Fractals. 196. 116394. (2025)

2025

[7] [7]

R.J. Donnely. Quantum Vortices in Helium II Cambrige Univ. Press. (1991)

1991

[8] [8]

Talalov // Chaos, Solitons and Fractals

S.V. Talalov // Chaos, Solitons and Fractals. 202. 117582. (2026)

2026