Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 92 references

Brownian motion at various length scales with hydrodynamic and direct interactions

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A spherical probe's diffusion in a complex liquid can be written as a single integral over the liquid's wavevector-dependent viscosity, giving parameter-free predictions as the probe size varies.

desk verdict A serious linear-response framework for tracer diffusion in complex liquids, but the working formulas still lean on a kernel truncation justified by an inversion heuristic, not a derivation. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.15017 v2 pith:URNR6QWR submitted 2024-12-19 cond-mat.soft cond-mat.stat-mechphysics.bio-ph

Jeffrey C. Everts , Robert Ho{l}yst , Karol Makuch This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.softcond-mat.stat-mechphysics.bio-ph
keywords Brownianmotionself-diffusionwavevector-dependentviscosityhydrodynamicinteractionscomplexliquidstracerdiffusionhard-spheresuspensionsprobesizedependence
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 tries to establish that the self-diffusion of a spherical probe in a complex liquid can be computed from a single material function: the wavevector-dependent viscosity $\eta(k)$, which encodes how the liquid resists flow at every length scale. In this complex-liquid picture, the short-time translational diffusion coefficient becomes $D_{t,\mathrm{S}}(a) = \frac{k_{\mathrm{B}}T}{3\pi^2}\int_0^\infty dk\, j_0(ka)/\eta_\infty(k)$, and the long-time coefficient is controlled by $\eta_0(k)$ together with a probe-size-dependent correction factor. If correct, this turns tracer diffusion as a function of probe size into a parameter-free prediction from measured or computed $\eta(k)$, covering the crossover from solvent-dominated small probes to viscosity-dominated large probes. The authors test the leading approximation on hard-sphere crowders and reproduce the small-probe limit $D_{t,\mathrm{L}}/D_{t,0} \to 1 - \varphi/2$ without fit parameters, while identifying the large-probe long-time limit as an unresolved problem requiring probe-host hydrodynamic interactions.

What carries the argument

The central object is the wavevector-dependent viscosity $\eta(k)$, defined through effective fluid-flow equations obtained by averaging over host-particle configurations; $\eta_\infty(k)$ governs the short-time (infinite-frequency) response and $\eta_0(k)$ the long-time (zero-frequency) response, with $\eta(k)\to\eta_s$ at large $k$ and $\eta(k)\to\eta_{\mathrm{eff}}$ at $k\to0$. The argument is carried by decomposing hydrodynamic response kernels into reducible and irreducible parts so that all probe-independent physics is absorbed into $\eta(k)$, and by expanding the translational transfer kernel around its leading term $\delta(\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{R}_i)\mathbf{I}$, which turns the diffusion coefficients into single integrals over $j_0(ka)/\eta(k)$. This expansion is the step that makes the formulas tractable and is also the step whose validity the authors flag as approximate, since it may lose the solid-body-motion property of the exact one-body kernel.

What would settle it

Compute or measure the long-time self-diffusion of a hard-sphere tracer with $a/R\gg1$ in a hard-sphere crowder suspension and compare $D_{t,\mathrm{L}}/D_{t,0}$ with $\eta_s/\eta^0_{\mathrm{eff}}$: the paper's current approximations give $\eta_s/\eta^0_{\mathrm{eff}}(1-\varphi)$ when probe-host hydrodynamic interactions are partially included, or a divergence when they are omitted, so a converged value of $\eta_s/\eta^0_{\mathrm{eff}}$ would confirm the missing one-reflection terms, while any other value would falsify the proposed hierarchy of approximations.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that, after integrating out the host particles, the probe's short- and long-time self-diffusion coefficients are given by integrals over the wavevector-dependent viscosity of the complex liquid, namely $D_{t,\mathrm{S}}(a) = \frac{k_{\mathrm{B}}T}{3\pi^2}\int_0^\infty dk\, j_0(ka)/\eta_\infty(k)$ for short times and $D_{t,\mathrm{L}} = \frac{k_{\mathrm{B}}T}{3\pi^2}\int_0^\infty dk\, j_0(ka)/\eta_0(k)\,[1+\chi(a)]$ within the effective single-particle approximation for long times, with analogous formulas for rotational diffusion. The argument uses linear response theory to replace the solvent-picture description (solvent viscosity $\eta_s$ plus explicit crowders) by effective fluid-flow equations in which $\eta_\infty(k)$ or $\eta_0(k)$ appears as the length-scale-dependent viscous response. For sterically interacting hard spheres, the leading approximation yields the point-probe limit $D_{t,\mathrm{L}}/D_{t,0}\approx 1-\varphi/2$ in agreement with simulations, while the large-probe limit $a\to\infty$ in the long-time regime is shown to be sensitive to probe-host hydrodynamic interactions, which are not yet consistently included.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the simplest leading-order description of how particles transmit force to the fluid is both accurate and better than the exact one-body description, and that the remaining two-body hydrodynamic corrections are small; the paper's own unresolved large-probe long-time limit shows this premise is not yet fully consistent.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the formulas hold, tracer diffusivity as a function of probe radius is fixed once $\eta_\infty(k)$ or $\eta_0(k)$ is known, so size-dependent diffusion in crowded fluids can be predicted from viscosity measurements rather than from explicit many-body simulations.
  • The point-probe limit $D_{t,\mathrm{L}}/D_{t,0}\to 1-\varphi/2$ for hard-sphere crowders follows with no adjustable parameters and appears robust at finite volume fraction because of the information contained in $\eta_0(k)$.
  • The short-time large-probe limit reduces to the single-particle diffusion formula with the macroscopic infinite-frequency viscosity, a limit that in conventional mobility-expansion approaches requires high-order multipoles.
  • Rotational and translational short-time diffusion are tied by $D_{r,\mathrm{S}}(a)=-\frac{3}{4a}\frac{d}{da}D_{t,\mathrm{S}}(a)$, giving a consistency check against experiment or simulation.
  • The unresolved $a\to\infty$ long-time limit implies that probe-host hydrodynamic interactions must be included at least at the level of one reflection to obtain the macroscopic limit $\eta_s/\eta^0_{\mathrm{eff}}$; this is a concrete target for the next stage of the theory.

Reading between the lines

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

  • My inference: if $\eta(k)$ can be extracted from microrheology or from simulations of the host fluid alone, the same integral formula could give a practical route to predict diffusion of proteins and nanoparticles in biological fluids such as cytoplasm, where the crowder mixture is too complex to simulate explicitly.
  • My inference: the paper's hypothesis that two-body contributions suffice, thanks to the resummation inside $\eta(k)$, could be tested directly by comparing the one-integral predictions with full hydrodynamic simulations for binary hard-sphere mixtures across a range of size ratios $a/R$.
  • My inference: the unresolved large-probe long-time limit suggests a sharp falsifier: if a complete two-body treatment still yields a factor $(1-\varphi)$ rather than $\eta_s/\eta^0_{\mathrm{eff}}$, then the truncation at one reflection is not enough, and higher multipoles or three-body terms would need to enter.
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

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper develops a 'complex-liquid picture' for the self-diffusion of a spherical probe, in which the solvent viscosity ηs is replaced by wavevector-dependent viscosities η∞(k) (short time) and η0(k) (long time). Starting from the Smoluchowski equation and linear response theory, the authors derive formally exact expressions for the short- and long-time translational diffusion coefficients and the short-time rotational diffusion coefficient in terms of hydrodynamic response kernels and effective Green's functions. They then expand the transfer kernel about a center-delta term, obtaining explicit integral formulas such as Eq. (51) for Dt,S and Eqs. (67), (80) for Dt,L, and evaluate them for hard-sphere crowders. The paper checks the small-probe limit against Brownian dynamics simulations (Fig. 2), obtains the point-probe result Dt,L/Dt0 ≈ 1 - φ/2, and discusses the persistent difficulty of the large-probe limit for long-time diffusion, proposing an ad-hoc correction in Sec. IX.3. The paper is candid about the open problems in this limit.

Significance. If the explicit formulas were rigorously derived, the framework would be significant: it would connect a measurable, length-scale-dependent transport coefficient, η(k), to tracer diffusion as a function of probe size, including the crossover from solvent-dominated to effective-medium behavior. The formal sections (II-V) contain a coherent linear-response derivation of the complex-liquid representation, including the two-time-scale separation into instantaneous and retarded kernels. The paper also gives credit-worthy checkable results: the short-time limits a→0 and a→∞ are correctly reproduced, the point-probe limit for Dt,L is obtained with no fit parameters and agrees with independent Brownian-dynamics data (Fig. 2), and the rotational-diffusion relation Eq. (61) is a concrete prediction that can be tested against simulations or experiments. The manuscript is unusually honest about its limitations, explicitly labeling the large-probe long-time problem as open and the improvement in Sec. IX.3 as ad hoc. Those strengths make the paper worth publishing if the central approximation is either properly justified or clearly re-scoped as a conjecture.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. VII.1, Eqs. (45), (49), (51)] The explicit formula for Dt,S, Eq. (51), is obtained by keeping only the first term δ(r−Ri)I of the transfer-kernel expansion Eq. (49). The exact one-body translational transfer kernel of Eq. (45) is a surface delta, and using it would replace j0(ka) by j0(ka)^2 in Eq. (51). The only justification offered for preferring Eq. (49) is the inversion criterion of Ref. [65]: the j0(ka)^2 version yields unphysical divergent values for the wavevector-dependent viscosity. That is a phenomenological fitting heuristic, not a controlled microscopic expansion. Because Eqs. (57), (67), (73), and (80) all inherit this truncation, the paper's claim that Dt,S and Dt,L are 'first-principles' functionals of η∞,0(k) is stronger than the derivation supports. The authors themselves state in Sec. VI that Eq. (49) 'may lose' the solid-body-motion property of the exact kernel. Please either (i) provide a systematic small-parameter or error estimate that justifies the zeroth-order center-delta truncation, or (ii) reframe the explicit formulas as a conjecture validated by inversion data and simulation comparison, with the exact formalism of Secs. II-V presented as the first-principles starting point.
  2. [Sec. IX.3, Eqs. (84)-(87)] The 'RPY corr' modification in Eq. (86) inserts the factor [1−Ac12(s)] into the χ integrand ad hoc, with the sole purpose of enforcing χ→0 as a→∞ and hence the macroscopic limit Dt,L/Dt0 → ηs/η0_eff. This factor is not derived from the linear-response formalism of Secs. II-V; the paper's own text labels it an 'ad-hoc improvement.' The need for this patch demonstrates that probe-host hydrodynamic interactions are not yet consistently included in the long-time transfer-kernel treatment. Until either a derivation of Eq. (86) or a calculation that includes the second term of Eq. (49) (the µtd term, which is explicitly identified as missing in Sec. IX.2) is provided, the large-probe limit of Dt,L remains an open problem. The claim in Sec. X that 'the remaining problem lies in the limit a→∞' is correct and appropriately modest, but the central abstract statement that the approach provides 'a new perspective' should not be overstated as a derived result for that limit. In addition, Eq. (84) is presented without derivation; please show the steps from Eq. (65) and the boundary conditions to the stated closed form for χ.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'we start systematic studies of exact formal microscopic expressions' reads awkwardly; consider 'we begin systematic studies of formally exact microscopic expressions'.
  2. [Eq. (7)] The notation '∂β Φ(RN)/∂Rj' is ambiguous; it should be written as ∂[βΦ(RN)]/∂Rj or β∂Φ(RN)/∂Rj, depending on the intended meaning.
  3. [Fig. 2 caption] The figure caption says 'data points are taken from Brownian dynamics simulations of [89]'; please write 'from Ref. [89]' and clarify whether the simulations include hydrodynamic interactions among crowders, since the text says they do not.
  4. [Reference [89]] The author name 'Raczy l lo' appears with garbled spacing; it should be typeset as 'Raczylło' or the correctly transliterated form.
  5. [Sec. VI, Eq. (50)] The sum rule ∫dr Tret_F(r) = 0 is stated to follow from Newton's third law; it would help the reader to spell out the argument in one sentence, since the left-derivative acting on the equilibrium distribution is a nontrivial step.
  6. [Eq. (61)] The relation Dr,S(a) = −(3/4a) d/da Dt,S(a) is derived from the specific integral representations (51) and (57); please state explicitly that it is an identity for those approximate formulas, not a general exact relation, to avoid over-generalization.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The exact linear-response framework is self-contained, but the central explicit formulas inherit an underefended transfer-kernel truncation whose only stated justification is the authors' prior inversion practice in Ref. [65].

  1. ansatz smuggled in via citation [Sec. VII.1, Eq. (51) and the paragraph comparing j0(ka) with j0(ka)^2; see also Sec. VI, Eq. (49)]
    "we hypothesize that Eq. (51) is a better choice because it was shown in Ref. [65] that inversion of this expression gives physical values for the wavevector-dependent viscosity even for complex liquids for which η0_eff/ηs is large. When expanding the result around the exact one-body transfer kernel (the case with j0(ka)^2), we found unphysical (divergent) values for the wavevector-dependent viscosity. Therefore, it suggests that Eq. (49) is a better starting point than Eq. (45)."

    Eq. (51) is obtained from Eq. (40) by keeping only the center-delta term δ(r−Ri)I in Eq. (49), whereas the exact one-body transfer kernel in Eq. (45) is a surface delta and would give j0(ka)^2. The only stated reason for preferring j0(ka) over j0(ka)^2 is that inverting Eq. (51) 'gives physical values' in Ref. [65], a paper by the same authors, whose transfer-kernel approximation was itself made 'based on empirical grounds'. Because every explicit integral formula in the paper—Eqs. (51), (57), (67), (73), and (80)—inherits this truncation choice, the first-principles status of the central predictions is not independently secured. The paper itself concedes that Eq. (49) 'may lose' the solid-body-motion property of Eq.

full rationale

The formal development in Secs. II–V is not circular: η∞,0(k) is treated as an external input, and the exact complex-liquid representations (40), (43), and (44) follow from linear response and standard kernel decompositions without assuming the final diffusion results. The hard-sphere comparison in Sec. IX.1 uses independent Brownian-dynamics simulation data from Ref. [89], and the point-probe limit Dt,L/Dt,0 → 1 − φ/2 emerges from the explicitly solved L(s), not from fitting. However, the paper's most visible predictions—the j0(ka) integral formulas—rest on a truncation of the transfer-kernel expansion whose justification is a same-author inversion heuristic from Ref. [65]. The text openly labels this a hypothesis and acknowledges that the exact one-body kernel would give j0(ka)^2, and that the long-time large-probe limit is not obtained without an ad-hoc 'RPY corr' correction. This makes the central claim partially reliant on a self-citation-validated ansatz, but the independent simulation check and the substantial exact formal framework keep the circularity from being total. Score 4 reflects that the core predictions reduce, at the level of the transfer-kernel truncation, to a prior same-group empirical choice, while the surrounding derivation still has independent content.

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

The paper introduces no fitted constants; its main input is the pre-existing wavevector-dependent viscosity η(k). However, the practical formulas rely on several unproven truncation and approximation assumptions, one of which, the ad-hoc RPY correction, is chosen to force the correct large-probe limit.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Host particles are modeled as bead assemblies in an incompressible solvent with stick boundary conditions, governed by a Smoluchowski equation with pairwise additive interactions and mobility tensors.
    Sec. II, Eqs. (4)-(8); this is the microscopic starting point for all formal expressions.
  • domain assumption The wavevector-dependent viscosity functions η∞(k) and η0(k) are given, known quantities that encode the response of the complex liquid without the probe.
    Stated in the abstract and Sec. V; the entire complex-liquid representation assumes this input is available.
  • ad hoc to paper The transfer-kernel expansion Eq. (49) truncated at zeroth order, δ(r-Ri)I, is a valid approximation for computing diffusion coefficients.
    Secs. VI-VII. The authors choose this over the exact one-body kernel Eq. (45) because inversion of the resulting Eq. (51) gave physical values in Ref. [65], and they acknowledge it 'may lose' solid-body-motion properties.
  • domain assumption The irreducibility constraint on hydrodynamic response kernels can be dropped for the two-body contributions used in the long-time calculation.
    Sec. VIII.1, where the argument uses g'12(s) = h'12(s) for two-body contributions.
  • ad hoc to paper The Rotne-Prager-Yamakawa mobility plus an ad-hoc factor (1-Ac12) in Eq. (86) is sufficient to enforce the correct macroscopic-probe limit.
    Sec. IX.3; the correction is chosen specifically so that χ→0 for a→∞, a hand-selected modification rather than a fully derived consequence.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Brownian motion at various length scales with hydrodynamic and direct interactions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/URNR6QWR

@misc{pith2026241215017,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Brownian motion at various length scales with hydrodynamic and direct interactions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/URNR6QWR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.15017}
}
read the original abstract

Brownian motion is essential for describing diffusion in systems ranging from simple to complex liquids. Unlike simple liquids, which consist of only a solvent, complex liquids, such as colloidal suspensions or the cytoplasm of a cell, are mixtures of various constituents with different shapes and sizes. Describing Brownian motion in such multiscale systems is extremely challenging because direct and many-body hydrodynamic interactions (and their interplay) play a pivotal role. Diffusion of small particles is mainly governed by a low viscous character of the solution, whereas large particles experience a highly viscous flow of the complex liquid on the macro scale. A quantity that encodes hydrodynamics on both length scales is the wave-vector-dependent viscosity. Assuming this quantity to be known -- in contrast to most studies in which the solvent shear viscosity is given -- provides a new perspective on studying the diffusivity of a tracer, especially in situations where the tracer size can vary by several orders of magnitude. Here, we start systematic studies of exact formal microscopic expressions for the short- and long-time self-diffusion coefficients of a single probe particle in a complex liquid in terms of short-ranged hydrodynamic response kernels. We study Brownian motion as a function of the probe size, contrasting most theories that focus on self-diffusion as a function of the crowder volume fraction. We discuss the limits of small and large probe sizes for various levels of approximations in our theory, and discuss the current successes and shortcomings of our approach.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.15017 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Scheme of solvent picture versus complex-liquid pic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Long-time translational diffusion coefficient scaled [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison of various approximations to the quan [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 80 canonical work pages

  1. [65]

    Makuch, R

    K. Makuch, R. Ho lyst, T. Kalwarczyk, P. Garstecki, and J. F. Brady, Diffusion and flow in complex liquids, Soft Matter 16, 114 (2020)

    work page 2020

  2. [1]

    R. Brown, A brief account of microscopical observations made in the months of June, July and August 1827, on the particles contained in the pollen of plants; and on the general existence of active molecules in organic and inorganic bodies, Phil. Mag. 4, 161 (1828)

  3. [2]

    Perrin, Mouvement brownien et r´ ealit´ e mol´ eculaire, Ann

    J. Perrin, Mouvement brownien et r´ ealit´ e mol´ eculaire, Ann. Chimi. Phys. 18, 5 (1909)

    1909

  4. [3]

    Huang, I

    R. Huang, I. Chavez, K. M. Taute, B. Luki´ c, S. Jeney, M. G. Raizen, and E.-L. Florin, Direct observation of the full transition from ballistic to diffusive Brownian motion in a liquid, Nat. Phys. 7, 576 (2011)

    2011

  5. [4]

    Sutherland, A dynamical theory of diffusion for non- electrolytes and the molecular mass of albumin, Lond

    W. Sutherland, A dynamical theory of diffusion for non- electrolytes and the molecular mass of albumin, Lond. Edinb. Phil. Mag 9, 781 (1905)

    1905

  6. [5]

    Einstein, ¨Uber die von der molekularkinetischen The- orie der W¨ arme geforderte Bewegung von in ruhenden Fl¨ ussigkeiten suspendierten Teilchen, Ann

    A. Einstein, ¨Uber die von der molekularkinetischen The- orie der W¨ arme geforderte Bewegung von in ruhenden Fl¨ ussigkeiten suspendierten Teilchen, Ann. Phys.17, 549 (1905)

    1905

  7. [6]

    von Smoluchowski, Zur kinetischen Theorie der Brownschen Molekularbewegung und der Suspensionen, Ann

    M. von Smoluchowski, Zur kinetischen Theorie der Brownschen Molekularbewegung und der Suspensionen, Ann. Phys. 326, 756 (1906); An English translation can be found in: Marian Smoluchowski. Selected Scientific Works (edited by B. Cichocki) (Wydawnictwa Uniwer- sytetu Warszawskiego, 2017)

    1906

  8. [7]

    Black and M

    F. Black and M. Scholes, The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities, J. Political Econ. 81, 637 (1973)

    1973

Show all 92 references
  1. [8]

    R. C. Merton, Theory of rational option pricing, Bell J. Econ. Manage. Sci. 4, 141 (1973)

    1973

  2. [9]

    Langevin et al

    P. Langevin et al. , Sur la th´ eorie du mouvement brown- ien, CR Acad. Sci. Paris 146, 530 (1908)

    1908

  3. [10]

    G. E. Uhlenbeck and L. S. Ornstein, On the theory of the brownian motion, Phys. Rev. 36, 823 (1930)

    1930

  4. [11]

    Debye, Polar Molecules (Dover, New York, 1929)

    P. Debye, Polar Molecules (Dover, New York, 1929). 14

    1929

  5. [12]

    R. N. Zia, Active and passive microrheology: Theory and simulation, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech 50, 371 (2018)

    2018

  6. [13]

    Brenner, The Stokes resistance of an arbitrary parti- cle, Chem

    H. Brenner, The Stokes resistance of an arbitrary parti- cle, Chem. Eng. Sci. 18, 1 (1963)

    1963

  7. [14]

    J. Blum, S. Bruns, D. Rademacher, A. Voss, B. Willen- berg, and M. Krause, Measurement of the translational and rotational brownian motion of individual particles in a rarefied gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 230601 (2006)

    2006

  8. [15]

    E. J. Hinch, Application of the Langevin equation to fluid suspensions, J. Fluid Mech. 72, 499–511 (1975)

    1975

  9. [16]

    Hellmann, J

    M. Hellmann, J. Klafter, D. W. Heermann, and M. Weiss, Challenges in determining anomalous diffusion in crowded fluids, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 23, 234113 (2011)

    2011

  10. [17]

    Soza´ nski, A

    K. Soza´ nski, A. Wi´ sniewska, T. Kalwarczyk, and R. Ho lyst, Activation energy for mobility of dyes and pro- teins in polymer solutions: From diffusion of single par- ticles to macroscale flow, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 228301 (2013)

    2013

  11. [18]

    Gupta, R

    S. Gupta, R. Biehl, C. Sill, J. Allgaier, M. Sharp, M. Ohl, and D. Richter, Protein entrapment in polymeric mesh: Diffusion in crowded environment with fast process on short scales, Macromolecules 49, 1941 (2016)

    2016

  12. [19]

    Mandal, C

    S. Mandal, C. Kurzthaler, T. Franosch, and H. L¨ owen, Crowding-enhanced diffusion: An exact theory for highly entangled self-propelled stiff filaments, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 138002 (2020)

    2020

  13. [20]

    R. B. Jones and P. N. Pusey, Dynamics of suspended col- loidal spheres, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 42, 137 (1991)

    1991

  14. [21]

    J. A. Leegwater and G. Szamel, Dynamical properties of hard-sphere suspensions, Phys. Rev. A 46, 4999 (1992)

    1992

  15. [22]

    van Blaaderen, J

    A. van Blaaderen, J. Peetermans, G. Maret, and J. K. G. Dhont, Long-time self-diffusion of spherical colloidal par- ticles measured with fluorescence recovery after photo- bleaching, J. Chem. Phys. 96, 4591 (1992)

    1992

  16. [23]

    J. X. Zhu, D. J. Durian, J. M¨ uller, D. A. Weitz, and D. J. Pine, Scaling of transient hydrodynamic interac- tions in concentrated suspensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 2559 (1992)

    1992

  17. [24]

    P. N. Segr` e, S. P. Meeker, P. N. Pusey, and W. C. K. Poon, Viscosity and structural relaxation in suspensions of hard-sphere colloids, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 958 (1995)

    1995

  18. [25]

    Kalwarczyk, K

    T. Kalwarczyk, K. Sozanski, S. Jakiela, A. Wisniewska, E. Kalwarczyk, K. Kryszczuk, S. Hou, and R. Ho lyst, Length-scale dependent transport properties of colloidal and protein solutions for prediction of crystal nucleation rates, Nanoscale 6, 10340 (2014)

    2014

  19. [26]

    Roosen-Runge, M

    F. Roosen-Runge, M. Hennig, F. Zhang, R. M. Jacobs, M. Sztucki, H. Schober, T. Seydel, and F. Schreiber, Pro- tein self-diffusion in crowded solutions, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108, 11815 (2011)

    2011

  20. [27]

    Bubak, K

    G. Bubak, K. Kwapiszewska, T. Kalwarczyk, K. Bielec, T. Andryszewski, M. Iwan, S. Bubak, and R. Ho lyst, Quantifying nanoscale viscosity and structures of liv- ing cells nucleus from mobility measurements, J. Phys. Chem. Lett 12, 294 (2021)

    2021

  21. [28]

    W. M. ´Smigiel, L. Mantovanelli, D. S. Linnik, M. Punter, J. Silberberg, L. Xiang, K. Xu, and B. Poolman, Protein diffusion in Escherichia coli cytoplasm scales with the mass of the complexes and is location dependent, Sci. Adv. 8, eabo5387 (2022)

    2022

  22. [29]

    W. Y. Huang, X. Cheng, and J. E. Ferrell Jr, Cytoplas- mic organization promotes protein diffusion in xenopus extracts, Nat. Commun 13, 5599 (2022)

    2022

  23. [30]

    Szyma´ nski, A

    J. Szyma´ nski, A. Patkowski, A. Wilk, P. Garstecki, and R. Ho lyst, Diffusion and viscosity in a crowded environ- ment: from nano-to macroscale, J. Phys. Chem. B 110, 25593 (2006)

    2006

  24. [31]

    Hess and R

    W. Hess and R. Klein, Long-time versus short-time be- haviour of a system of interacting brownian particles, J. Phys. A 13, L5 (1980)

    1980

  25. [32]

    J. K. Dhont, An introduction to dynamics of colloids (El- sevier, 1996)

    1996

  26. [33]

    G. K. Batchelor, Brownian diffusion of particles with hy- drodynamic interaction, J. Fluid Mech 74, 1–29 (1976)

    1976

  27. [34]

    G. K. Batchelor, Diffusion in a dilute polydisperse sys- tem of interacting spheres, J. Fluid Mech 131, 155–175 (1983); corrected in: J. Fluid Mech 137, 467–469 (1983)

    1983

  28. [35]

    H. J. H. Clercx and P. P. J. M. Schram, Three parti- cle hydrodynamic interactions in suspensions, J. Chem. Phys. 96, 3137 (1992)

    1992

  29. [36]

    H. N. W. Lekkerkerker and J. K. G. Dhont, On the calcu- lation of the self-diffusion coefficient of interacting Brow- nian particles, J. Chem. Phys. 80, 5790 (1984)

    1984

  30. [37]

    B. U. Felderhof, Diffusion of interacting brownian parti- cles, J. Phys. A 11, 929 (1978)

    1978

  31. [38]

    Cichocki and B

    B. Cichocki and B. U. Felderhof, Short-time diffusion co- efficients and high frequency viscosity of dilute suspen- sions of spherical Brownian particles, J. Chem. Phys. 89, 1049 (1988)

    1988

  32. [39]

    Cichocki and B

    B. Cichocki and B. U. Felderhof, Long-time self-diffusion coefficient and zero-frequency viscosity of dilute suspen- sions of spherical Brownian particles, J. Chem. Phys. 89, 3705 (1988)

    1988

  33. [40]

    Van Den Broeck, An exact result for the incoherent scattering function in dilute suspensions, J

    C. Van Den Broeck, An exact result for the incoherent scattering function in dilute suspensions, J. Chem. Phys. 82, 4248 (1985)

    1985

  34. [41]

    Cichocki and B

    B. Cichocki and B. U. Felderhof, Self-diffusion of Brow- nian particles with hydrodynamic interaction and square step or well potential, J. Chem. Phys. 94, 563 (1991)

    1991

  35. [42]

    Watzlawek and G

    M. Watzlawek and G. N¨ agele, Self-diffusion coefficients of charged particles: Prediction of nonlinear volume frac- tion dependence, Phys. Rev. E 56, 1258 (1997)

    1997

  36. [43]

    G. H. Koenderink, M. P. Lettinga, and A. P. Philipse, Rotational dynamics of charged colloidal spheres: Role of particle interactions, J. Chem. Phys. 117, 7751 (2002)

    2002

  37. [44]

    Imhof and J

    A. Imhof and J. K. G. Dhont, Long-time self-diffusion in binary colloidal hard-sphere dispersions, Phys. Rev. E 52, 6344 (1995)

    1995

  38. [45]

    G. H. Koenderink, H. Zhang, M. P. Lettinga, G. N¨ agele, and A. P. Philipse, Rotational tracer diffusion in bi- nary colloidal sphere mixtures, Phys. Rev. E 64, 022401 (2001)

    2001

  39. [46]

    Degiorgio, R

    V. Degiorgio, R. Piazza, and R. B. Jones, Rotational diffusion in concentrated colloidal dispersions of hard spheres, Phys. Rev. E 52, 2707 (1995)

    1995

  40. [47]

    Beenakker and P

    C. Beenakker and P. Mazur, Diffusion of spheres in a concentrated suspension: Resummation of many-body hydrodynamic interactions, Phys. Lett A 98, 22 (1983)

    1983

  41. [48]

    Medina-Noyola, Long-time self-diffusion in concen- trated colloidal dispersions, Phys

    M. Medina-Noyola, Long-time self-diffusion in concen- trated colloidal dispersions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 2705 (1988)

    1988

  42. [49]

    J. F. Brady, The long-time self-diffusivity in concentrated colloidal dispersions, J. Fluid Mech 272, 109–134 (1994)

    1994

  43. [50]

    S. S. L. Peppin, Theory of tracer diffusion in concentrated hard-sphere suspensions, J. Fluid Mech 870, 1105–1126 (2019). 15

    2019

  44. [51]

    D. S. Dean and A. Lef` evre, Self-diffusion in a system of interacting Langevin particles, Phys. Rev. E 69, 061111 (2004)

    2004

  45. [52]

    D´ emery and D

    V. D´ emery and D. S. Dean, Perturbative path-integral study of active- and passive-tracer diffusion in fluctuating fields, Phys. Rev. E 84, 011148 (2011)

    2011

  46. [53]

    D´ emery, O

    V. D´ emery, O. B´ enichou, and H. Jacquin, Generalized Langevin equations for a driven tracer in dense soft col- loids: construction and applications, New J. Phys 16, 053032 (2014)

    2014

  47. [54]

    Wisniewska, K

    A. Wisniewska, K. Sozanski, T. Kalwarczyk, K. Kedra- Krolik, and R. Holyst, Scaling equation for viscosity of polymer mixtures in solutions with application to dif- fusion of molecular probes, Macromolecules 50, 4555 (2017)

    2017

  48. [55]

    Kalwarczyk, N

    T. Kalwarczyk, N. Ziebacz, A. Bielejewska, E. Zabok- licka, K. Koynov, J. Szymanski, A. Wilk, A. Patkowski, J. Gapinski, H.-J. Butt, and R. Ho lyst, Comparative analysis of viscosity of complex liquids and cytoplasm of mammalian cells at the nanoscale, Nano Letters 11, 2157 (2011)

    2011

  49. [56]

    E. Axpe, D. Chan, G. S. Offeddu, Y. Chang, D. Merida, H. L. Hernandez, and E. A. Appel, A multiscale model for solute diffusion in hydrogels, Macromolecules52, 6889 (2019)

    2019

  50. [57]

    Krichevsky and G

    O. Krichevsky and G. Bonnet, Fluorescence correlation spectroscopy: the technique and its applications, Rep. Prog. Phys 65, 251 (2002)

    2002

  51. [58]

    Sanabria, Y

    H. Sanabria, Y. Kubota, and M. N. Waxham, Multiple diffusion mechanisms due to nanostructuring in crowded environments, Biophys. J. 92, 313 (2007)

    2007

  52. [59]

    Holyst, A

    R. Holyst, A. Bielejewska, J. Szyma´ nski, A. Wilk, A. Patkowski, J. Gapi´ nski, A. ˙Zywoci´ nski, T. Kalwar- czyk, E. Kalwarczyk, M. Tabaka, N. Ziebacz, and S. Wieczorek, Scaling form of viscosity at all length-scales in poly(ethylene glycol) solutions studied by fluorescence...

    2009

  53. [60]

    Kr¨ uger and M

    M. Kr¨ uger and M. Rauscher, Diffusion of a sphere in a dilute solution of polymer coils, J. Chem. Phys. 131, 094902 (2009)

    2009

  54. [61]

    Miyaguchi, Reduction of self-diffusion coefficient in a coarse-grained model of cytoplasm, Phys

    T. Miyaguchi, Reduction of self-diffusion coefficient in a coarse-grained model of cytoplasm, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 013279 (2020)

    2020

  55. [62]

    Einstein, Eine neue bestimmung der molek¨ uldimen- sionen, Ann

    A. Einstein, Eine neue bestimmung der molek¨ uldimen- sionen, Ann. Phys. 324, 289 (1906); corrected in: Ann. Phys. 339, 591 (1911)

    1906

  56. [63]

    G. K. Batchelor and J. T. Green, The determination of the bulk stress in a suspension of spherical particles to order c2, J. Fluid Mech 56, 401–427 (1972)

    1972

  57. [64]

    G. K. Batchelor, The effect of brownian motion on the bulk stress in a suspension of spherical particles, J. Fluid Mech 83, 97–117 (1977)

    1977

  58. [66]

    Rouse, Prince E., A Theory of the Linear Viscoelas- tic Properties of Dilute Solutions of Coiling Polymers, J

    J. Rouse, Prince E., A Theory of the Linear Viscoelas- tic Properties of Dilute Solutions of Coiling Polymers, J. Chem. Phys. 21, 1272 (1953)

    1953

  59. [67]

    B. H. Zimm, Dynamics of Polymer Molecules in Dilute Solution: Viscoelasticity, Flow Birefringence and Dielec- tric Loss, J. Chem. Phys. 24, 269 (1956)

    1956

  60. [68]

    Felderhof, The effect of Brownian motion on the trans- port properties of a suspension of spherical particles, Phys

    B. Felderhof, The effect of Brownian motion on the trans- port properties of a suspension of spherical particles, Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl. 118, 69 (1983)

    1983

  61. [69]

    P. G. Wolynes and J. M. Deutch, Dynamical orientation correlations in solution, J. Chem. Phys. 67, 733 (1977)

    1977

  62. [70]

    Felderhof, Brownian motion and creeping flow on the Smoluchowski time scale, Physica A 147, 203 (1987)

    B. Felderhof, Brownian motion and creeping flow on the Smoluchowski time scale, Physica A 147, 203 (1987)

    1987

  63. [71]

    Felderhof and R

    B. Felderhof and R. Jones, Linear response theory of the viscosity of suspensions of spherical brownian particles, Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl. 146, 417 (1987)

    1987

  64. [72]

    Felderhof and R

    B. Felderhof and R. Jones, Linear response theory of sed- imentation and diffusion in a suspension of spherical par- ticles, Physica A 119, 591 (1983)

    1983

  65. [73]

    Cichocki, B

    B. Cichocki, B. Felderhof, and R. Schmitz, The effective viscosity of suspensions and emulsions of spherical parti- cles, Stat. Mech. Appl. 154, 233 (1989)

    1989

  66. [74]

    Mazur and D

    P. Mazur and D. Bedeaux, A generalization of Fax´ en’s theorem to nonsteady motion of a sphere through an incompressible fluid in arbitrary flow, Physica 76, 235 (1974)

    1974

  67. [75]

    Felderhof and R

    B. Felderhof and R. Jones, Convective motion and trans- fer of force by many-body hydrodynamic interaction, Physica A 146, 404 (1987)

    1987

  68. [76]

    Szymczak and B

    P. Szymczak and B. Cichocki, Memory effects in collec- tive dynamics of Brownian suspensions, J. Chem. Phys. 121, 3329 (2004)

    2004

  69. [77]

    Cichocki and B

    B. Cichocki and B. U. Felderhof, Self-diffusion in suspen- sions of interacting Brownian particles, Phys. Rev. A 42, 6024 (1990)

    1990

  70. [78]

    Cichocki, M

    B. Cichocki, M. L. Ekiel-Je˙ zewska, P. Szymczak, and E. Wajnryb, Three-particle contribution to sedimenta- tion and collective diffusion in hard-sphere suspensions, J. Chem. Phys. 117, 1231 (2002)

    2002

  71. [79]

    Cichocki, M

    B. Cichocki, M. L. Ekiel-Je˙ zewska, and E. Wajnryb, Three-particle contribution to effective viscosity of hard- sphere suspensions, J. Chem. Phys. 119, 606 (2003)

    2003

  72. [80]

    Szymczak and B

    P. Szymczak and B. Cichocki, A diagrammatic approach to response problems in composite systems, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp 2008, P01025 (2008)

    2008

  73. [81]

    Felderhof, Many-body hydrodynamic interactions in suspensions, Phys

    B. Felderhof, Many-body hydrodynamic interactions in suspensions, Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl. 151, 1 (1988)

    1988

  74. [82]

    B. U. Felderhof and R. B. Jones, Displacement theorems for spherical solutions of the linear navier–stokes equa- tions, J. Math. Phys 30, 339 (1989)

    1989

  75. [83]

    Cichocki, B

    B. Cichocki, B. Felderhof, and R. Schmitz, Hydro- dynamic interactions between two spherical particles, PhysicoChem. Hyd 10, 383 (1988)

    1988

  76. [84]

    Schmitz and B

    R. Schmitz and B. Felderhof, Mobility matrix for two spherical particles with hydrodynamic interaction, Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl. 116, 163 (1982)

    1982

  77. [85]

    Wajnryb, K

    E. Wajnryb, K. A. Mizerski, P. J. Zuk, and P. Szymczak, Generalization of the Rotne–Prager–Yamakawa mobility and shear disturbance tensors, J. Fluid Mech 731, R3 (2013)

    2013

  78. [86]

    P. J. Zuk, E. Wajnryb, K. A. Mizerski, and P. Szymczak, Rotne–Prager–Yamakawa approximation for different- sized particles in application to macromolecular bead models, J. Fluid Mech 741, R5 (2014)

    2014

  79. [87]

    P. J. Zuk, B. Cichocki, and P. Szymczak, Intrin- sic viscosity of macromolecules within the generalized Rotne–Prager–Yamakawa approximation, J. Fluid Mech 822, R2 (2017)

    2017

  80. [88]

    Beenakker, The effective viscosity of a concentrated suspension of spheres (and its relation to diffusion), Phys- 16 ica A 128, 48 (1984)

    C. Beenakker, The effective viscosity of a concentrated suspension of spheres (and its relation to diffusion), Phys- 16 ica A 128, 48 (1984)

    1984

  81. [89]

    Raczy l lo, D

    E. Raczy l lo, D. Go lowicz, T. Sk´ ora, K. Kazimierczuk, and S. Kondrat, Size sensitivity of metabolite diffusion in macromolecular crowds, Nano Lett. 24, 4801 (2024)

    2024

  82. [90]

    Rotne and S

    J. Rotne and S. Prager, Variational Treatment of Hy- drodynamic Interaction in Polymers, J. Chem. Phys. 50, 4831 (1969)

    1969

  83. [91]

    Yamakawa, Transport Properties of Polymer Chains in Dilute Solution: Hydrodynamic Interaction, J

    H. Yamakawa, Transport Properties of Polymer Chains in Dilute Solution: Hydrodynamic Interaction, J. Chem. Phys. 53, 436 (1970)

    1970

  84. [92]

    J. F. Brady and G. Bossis, Stokesian dynamics, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech 20, 111 (1988)

    1988

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.