Stability of Leapfrogging Vortex Pairs: A Semi-analytic Approach
Stability of Leapfrogging Vortex Pairs: A Semi-analytic Approach
Behring, Brandon M.;Goodman, Roy H.
2019-08-22 00:00:00
Brandon M. Behring and Roy H. Goodman Department of Mathematical Sciences; New Jersey Institute of Technology University Heights Newark; NJ 07102 We investigate the stability of a one-parameter family of periodic solutions of the four-vortex problem known as `leapfrogging' orbits. These solutions, which consist of two pairs of identical yet oppositely-signed vortices, were known to W. Gr obli (1877) and A. E. H. Love (1883), and can be parameterized by a dimensionless parameter related to the geometry of the initial con guration. Simulations by Acheson (2000) and numerical Floquet analysis by Tophj and Aref (2012) both indicate, to many digits, that the bifurcation occurs when 1= = , where is the golden ratio. This study aims to explain the origin of this remarkable value. Using a trick from the gravitational two-body problem, we change variables to render the Floquet problem in an explicit form that is more amenable to analysis. We then implement G. W. Hill's method of harmonic balance to high order using computer algebra to construct a rapidly-converging sequence of asymptotic approximations to the bifurcation value, con rming the value found earlier. I. INTRODUCTION introduces additional terms into the equations of motion. Ref. [11], for example, shows nicely how experiment and mathematical theory have been used together to explore Point-vortex motion arises in the study of concentrated these nonlinear phenomena. vorticity in an ideal, incompressible
uid described by The leapfrogging solution to the point-vortex system Euler's equations. The two-dimensional Euler equations of equations is built from simple components. As is well- of
uid mechanics, a partial dierential equation (PDE) known, two vortices of equal and of opposite-signed vor- system, support a solution in which the vorticity is con- ticity move in parallel at a uniform speed with their com- centrated at a single point. Helmholtz derived a system mon velocity inversely proportional to the distance be- of ordinary dierential equations (ODEs) that describe tween them. Two vortices of equal and like-signed vor- the motion of a set of interacting vortices that behave ticity, by contrast, trace a circular path with a constant as discrete particles, which approximates the
uid mo- rotation rate proportional to the inverse square of the tion in the case that the vorticity is concentrated in very distance between them, see Fig. 1. small regions [1]. This system of equations has continued Now consider a system of four vortices of equal to provide interesting questions for over 150 years. For a strength, arranged collinearly and symmetrically at t = thorough introduction and review see Refs. [2{4]. + + 0, with vortices of strength positive one at z and z 1 2 Kirchho formulated these equations as a Hamiltonian and vortices of strength negative one at z and z ; see system [3, 5]. This has allowed researchers to apply to 1 2 Fig. 2. Throughout this paper we represent particle posi- this system a wide repertoire of methods that were devel- tions by points in the complex z plane. Let the `breadths' oped in the study of the gravitational N -body problem. of the pairs denote the distances d = jz z j and In this paper, we consider a con guration of vortices with 1 1 d = jz z j> d at t = 0. This symmetric collinear vanishing total circulation, which has no analogue in the 2 1 2 2 state depends, after a scaling, on only one dimension- N -body problem. As such, many techniques developed less parameter, the ratio of the breadths of the pairs, for the gravitational problem do not apply to the net- = d =d . zero circulation case of the N -vortex problem. Because 1 2 This con guration provides the initial condition for a of this, this case of the N -vortex problem is relatively remarkable family of relative periodic orbits known as less studied, despite its physical importance and mathe- `leapfrogging orbits', described rst by Gr obli in 1877 [12] matical richness, Ref. [6{8]. and independently by Love (1883) [13]. It can be con- Bose-Einstein condensates (BEC), a quantum state of sidered as a simple two-dimensional model of the phe- matter that exists at ultra-low temperatures, have pro- nomenon of two smoke rings passing through each other vided an experimental testbed in which point vortices periodically, rst discussed by Helmholtz in 1858 [1, 14]. can be studied in the laboratory. These were rst ob- Recall that a relative periodic orbit is de ned as an orbit served experimentally in Ref. [9] in 1995, work that led that is periodic modulo a group orbit of a symmetry of to the 2001 Nobel Prize in Physics for Cornell and Wie- the system, in this case translation. man, along with Ketterle. The same group experimen- With reference to Fig. 2, the two vortices z and z tally demonstrated concentrated vortices in BECs [10]. 1 1 starting closer to the center of symmetry initially have This has led in the last 20 years to a new
owering of larger rightward velocity than the outer pair, z and interest in point vortices. In this experimental system, z . As the `inner pair' propagates, the distance between the BEC is con ned using a strong magnetic eld that them increases, causing them to slow down. Simulta- neously, the distance between the `outer pair' decreases, causing them to speed up. After half a period, the iden- tities of the inner and outer pairs are interchanged and Electronic address: bmb29@njit.edu Electronic address: goodman@njit.edu the process repeats. This relative periodic motion ex- arXiv:1908.08618v2 [nlin.CD] 9 Nov 2019 2 FIG. 1: (a) Opposite-signed vortices move in parallel along straight lines. (b) Like-signed vortices move along a circular path. nential separation due to linear instability, the perturbed solutions could transition into one of two behaviors: a bounded orbit he called `walkabout' and an unbounded orbit he called `disintegration.' In the walkabout orbit, two like-signed vortices couple together and the motion resembles that of a three-vortex system. In disintegra- tion, four vortices separate into two pairs|each pair con- sisting one negative and one positive vortex|that escape to in nity along two transverse rays, see Fig. 3. Ache- son noted that disintegration seemed only to occur for ratios < 0:29. It should be clearly noted that the analysis used in this paper is able only to distinguish between linearly stable and unstable periodic orbits and tells us nothing about the mechanism of escape, which is the subject of a paper currently in preparation by the authors. Tophj and Aref, having noticed similar behavior in FIG. 2: Motion in physical (z) space. Average motion is from the chaotic scattering of identical point vortices [16], left to right. Markers are given every half-period. studied the stability problem further [17]. They exam- ined linearized perturbations about the periodic orbit, thereby reducing the stability question to a Floquet prob- ists only for a nite range of breadth-ratios < < 1 p lem. They con rm Acheson's value of via the numer- where = 3 2 2 0:171573. As approaches one, ical solution of this Floquet problem. However, their the distance separating the members of each pair of like- attempt at a more mathematical derivation of the fortu- signed vortices becomes small compared to the distance itous value of depends on an ad hoc argument based on between the two pairs. Each pair of like-signed vortices `freezing' the time-dependent coecients at their value at rotates quickly in a nearly circular orbit about its cen- t = 0, a method that has been known to sometimes pro- ter of vorticity, similar to that of Fig. 1(b). The velocity duce incorrect results [18, 19]. In addition, they note eld due to this pair is asymptotically close to that of from numerical simulations that there does not exist a a single vortex of twice the vorticity. Thus each pair of value of precisely separating walkabout from disinte- vortices moves with a velocity approximately given by gration behavior. Rather, both can occur at the same such a velocity eld and the two pairs move approxi- value of depending on the form of the perturbation. mately along parallel lines in a motion resembling that More recently, Whitchurch et al. [20] examined the sys- depicted in Fig. 1(a). As the parameter is decreased, tem through the extensive use of numerically calculated the coupling between the four vortices is stronger, and Poincar e surfaces of section. They observe that the bi- the motion can no longer be so neatly decoupled into furcation at = is of Hamiltonian pitchfork type. two weakly-interacting pairs. This can lead to instability They also identify a third type of breakup behavior in as the pairs approach each other and interact strongly addition to walkabout and disintegration, which they call enough to pull the pairs apart. braiding, see Fig. 3(b). The existence of such a motion is Direct numerical simulations by Acheson suggest that implicit in the earlier three-vortex work of Rott [21] and the leapfrogging solution is stable only for > = the chaotic scattering work of Tophj and Aref [16]. 2 3 5 = 0:38, where is the golden ratio [15]. No satisfactory analytical explanation for the special Acheson observed that, after an initial period of expo- value of the bifurcation = exists in the literature, 2 3 FIG. 3: Motion in physical (z) space. (a) This solution features several bouts of walkabout motion including one extended period of three consecutive walkabout `dances'. (b) In this solution the last period of walkabout is braided as the two negative (blue) vortices take turns orbiting the tightly bound pair of positive (red) vortices.(c) A leapfrogging motion that transitions to walkabout motion before disintegrating. (d) A leapfrogging motion that disintegrates without a walkabout stage. as all previous explanations have relied on numerical so- II. EQUATIONS OF MOTION lution of the initial value problem. In the present work, we rewrite the Floquet system in a form that allows for In this section, we will review the Hamiltonian frame- further analysis and use this to provide a semi-analytic work for the N -vortex problem and introduce a reduction argument for the bifurcation value using the method of due to Aref and Eckhardt [7] and apply it to the leapfrog- harmonic balance evaluate the Hill's determinant for the ging problem. We use complex coordinates to label the linearized perturbation equations. locations of the N vortices located at z (t) = x + iy j j j and denote their (signed) vorticities by . The locations of the vortices, given as coordinates in The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. In the complex plane, evolve as a Hamiltonian system with Sec. II, we review the equations of motion for the N - Hamiltonian function over the conjugate variables z and vortex problem and a canonical reduction of the phase z , space from four degrees-of-freedom to two. In Sec. III we i discuss the leapfrogging solution and summarize some of its properties. Further, we write down the linearized H(z; z ) = log (z z ) z z : i j i j i j perturbation equations about the leapfrog orbit and dis- 4 1i<jN cuss the relevant Floquet theory needed to understand its stability. The coecients in these linearized perturba- with Poisson brackets tion equations had not been given in explicit form before now. In Sec. IV, we introduce canonical polar coordinates jk and rewrite the stability equations explicitly in terms of fz ; z g = fz ; z g = 0 and fz ; z g = : j k j j k k the polar angle variable. We then expand this solution in terms of a small parameter and introduce a change When written in real coordinates, the conjugate vari- of variables that further simpli es the later analysis. In ables are the x- and y-components of the motion. That Sec. V, we rst review Hill's method of harmonic balance. is, the position space and the phase space coincide. This We then implement it to high order in a computer alge- gives rise to a system of rst order equations of motion. bra system, thereby constructing a systematic and semi- analytic approximation to the bifurcation value. Lastly, @H in Sec. VI, we summarize our work and discuss avenues z _ = 2i ; j j for further study. @z j 4 where III. THE LEAPFROGGING SOLUTION AND ITS LINEARIZATION @ 1 @ @ = + i : @z 2 @x @y A. Leapfrogging solutions For the leapfrogging problem, it is convenient to la- bel the locations of the four vortices with the notation At this point we nd it preferable to again write the + + + z ; z ; z ; z , which are assigned vorticities = 1 1 1 2 2 1;2 system in terms of real-valued coordinates and introduce and = 1 [17]. The transformation the notation Z = X + iP and W = Q + iY . In these 1;2 coordinates, (X; Q) is conjugate to (Y; P ). The subspace 1 1 + + + + = z + z z z ; = z + z + z + z ; P = Q = 0 is invariant under the motion, and corre- 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 sponds exactly to the family of leapfrogging motions. On 1 1 + + + + Z = z z + z z ; W = z z z + z ; this invariant plane, Z = X and W = iY and the Hamil- 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 tonian (3) assumes only real values. The coordinates (1) (X; Y ) evolve under the one degree-of-freedom Hamilto- is canonical, i.e., it preserves the Hamiltonian form of nian system with Hamiltonian, the equations, as can be con rmed by computing the Poisson brackets of the new coordinates [22]. It is useful 1 1 1 to reduce the number of degrees-of-freedom from four to H (X; Y ) = H(X; iY ) = log : 2 2 2 1 Y 1 + X two [7]. In these variables Z is the vector connecting the + + (4) centers of separations d = z z and d = z z , 1 2 1 1 2 2 whereas W = (d d ) is half the dierence between the 1 2 To simplify the mathematical analysis and allow the two separations. Further = (d + d ) is one half the 1 2 2 use of standard perturbation techniques, we make the conserved linear impulse of the system and its conjugate following elementary observation. Given a Hamiltonian is twice the centroid. system with Hamiltonian H (q; p), consider the modi ed Following this transformation (1), the Hamiltonian system with Hamiltonian H (q; p) = f H (q; p), where f 2 C and is monotonic. Then the two systems have 1 1 1 H = log the same trajectories and equivalent dynamics up to a 2 2 2 2 2 Z W reparameterization of time by a factor of f (H ). We apply this observation to the Hamiltonian (4), is cyclic in the variable , which implies that is con- which we note is singular at (X; Y ) = (0; 0). This is the served, i.e. (t) = (0) = . limit approaches one, where the like-signed vortices co- By making appropriate scalings of both the indepen- alesce into a single vortex with vorticity two. This causes dent and dependent variables (in the generic case 6= 0), the frequency of nearby oscillations to diverge to in nity. we arrive at the two degree-of-freedom Hamiltonian In order to desingularize the dynamics in this neighbor- 1 1 1 hood, we rede ne the Hamiltonian (2) using H(Z;W ) = log : (2) 2 2 2 1 +Z 1 +W 2H H = f (H) = e ; The evolution equations for the (complex-valued) coor- dinates Z , W and the centroid are given by yielding the non-singular Hamiltonian in the invariant plane dZ 1 1 = iW + ; 2 2 2 dt Z W 1 +W 1 1 1 1 2H(X;Y ) H (X; Y ) = e = (5) 2 2 dW 1 1 2 2 1 Y 1 + X = iZ + ; 2 2 2 dt W Z 1 +Z and the new time scale d 1 1 = + : 2H 2 2 ~ t = t = e t: (6) dt 1 +Z 1 +W f (H ) Tophj notes that these are the canonical equations of The Hamiltonian in complex coordinates is regularized motion not of Hamiltonian (2) but of its extension to the in the same manner, complex-valued Hamiltonian 1 1 1 1 1 1 H (Z;W ) = log ; (3) H(Z;W ) = f (H (Z;W )) = : (7) 2 2 2 2 2 1 +Z 1 +W 2 1 +Z 1 +W which has equations of motion For ease of notation, we will drop the tildes for the re- mainder of the paper. We also break with prior conven- dZ @H dW @H = i ; = i : tion and use the value h of the Hamiltonian H in (5) to dt @W dt @Z parameterize the family of solutions, rather than using The topic of complex-valued Hamiltonians is not widely the ratio of the breadths of the vortex pairs, , as was known, so we provide a reference [23]. done in previous work [13, 15, 17]. 5 With respect to energy level, h, leapfrogging motions T . Each is a linear Hamiltonian system since leapfrog occur for 0 < h < h = and the leapfrogging motion the matrix A(t) on the right-hand side can be written 0 1 has been found numerically to be stable for 0 < h < h = as A = JH where J = and H is symmetric. 1 0 (1 ) In order to analyze these equations, we need to under- . The two parameters are related by h = . 8 8 stand the behavior of solutions to the linear system with The Hamiltonian (5) yields evolution equations time-periodic coecients, dependent on a parameter , dX @H Y = + = + ; dt @Y X = A(t; )X; A(t) = A(t + T ; ); (11) (1 Y ) (8) dY @H X = = ; which is known as a Floquet problem [18, 24, 25]. To dt @X (1 + X ) understand the behavior of solutions of equations of the form (11), we must review some basic facts from Floquet whose phase plane is shown in Fig. 4. In [12], Gr obli theory. De ne the fundamental solution operator (t) as integrated the equations of motion (8) to nd an implicit the matrix-valued solution to (11) with (0) = I . The formula for X (t). In our notation, this is given by monodromy matrix is de ned as the solution operator evaluated at one period M = (T ). The eigenvalues, , 1 1 t(X ) = p F sin jk E sin jk of M are called the Floquet multipliers. If any multiplier 2 2 2h 1 4h satis es jj > 1, then the solutions of the system of (9) 1 + 2h equations (11) include an exponentially growing solution p ; 2h (1 2h) (2h (X + 1) + 1) and the system is considered unstable. If A(t) is a 22 Hamiltonian matrix, the Floquet multi- 2h 1 2 4h pliers comes in pairs () and () such that = 1. 1 2 1 2 where = X , k = , and F and E are 2h 4h 1 If have nonzero imaginary part, then the two mul- 1;2 incomplete elliptic integral of the rst and second kind tipliers must lie on the unit circle and be conjugate. If respectively. To study the stability of these trajectories are real and j j6= 1, then one multiplier lies inside 1;2 1 as solutions to (7), it would be useful to write them in an the unit circle and the other lies outside the unit circle, explicit closed form. Unfortunately, (9) does not seem and the system is unstable. On the boundary between to be invertible to yield an explicit formula for X (t). stability and instability, the two eigenvalues must both Nonetheless, in Sec. IV we reformulate the problem in or- lie on the unit circle and be real-valued, i.e., they must der provides an explicit formulation of the stability prob- satisfy = = 1. 1 2 lem without having to invert this formula. The Floquet multipliers depend continuously on the parameter . Therefore, bifurcations, i.e., changes in stability, can only occur with = = 1 [25]. The 1 2 B. Floquet theory and the linearized perturbation existence of a multiplier = 1 (respectively = 1) equations corresponds to the existence of a periodic orbit with pe- riod T (respectively, an anti-periodic orbit of half-period To analyze the linear stability of the periodic orbit T ). The stability or instability is easily determined by (t) = (X (t); Y (t); 0; 0), we perturb the evolution h h h examining tr(M ) = + , with stability in the case 1 2 equations corresponding to Hamiltonian (7) about the jtr(M )j < 2 and instability when jtr(M )j > 2. At the leapfrogging solution (X; Y; Q; P ) = (X (t); Y (t); 0; 0). bifurcation values, tr M = 2 and tr M = 2, the sys- We introduce perturbation coordinates tem (11) has a periodic orbit or an anti-periodic orbit, respectively. Z (t) = X (t) + [ (t) + i (t)]; + + We now return to the linearized perturbation equations W (t) = iY (t) + [ (t) + i (t)]; of the leapfrogging orbit (10). The coordinates ( ; ) describe perturbations within the family of periodic or- and expand the ODE system, keeping terms of linear bits. As such, the monodromy matrix for equation (10a) order in . The resulting equations decouple into two has eigenvalues 1 which can lead to at most linear- 1;2 2 2 systems, in-time divergence of trajectories; see [17]. The question of stability is therefore determined entirely by the sec- T T [ ; ] = A(X; Y ) [ ; ] and (10a) + + ond system (10b). Let Z = ( ; ), then (10b) can be dt written as T T [ ; ] = A (X; Y ) [ ; ] : (10b) + + dt dZ (t) = A(X (t); Y (t))Z (t); (12) h h dt where A(X; Y ) is given by 4 2 2 2 2 where XY 3Y +X Y +X Y 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 (X +Y )(1+X )(1 Y ) 2(X +Y )(1 Y ) A = : 4 2 2 2 2 3X +X Y Y +X XY 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 (X +Y )(1+X )(1 Y ) 2(X +Y )(1+X ) A(t) = A t + T (h) ; leapfrog Because these two systems depend only on quadratic terms in (X; Y ), the coecient matrices have period and the period of the leapfrogging motion, T , can leapfrog 6 FIG. 4: Level sets of the one-degree-of-freedom Hamiltonian (5) in the X Y plane, including the critical energy level H = h (bold) and the separatrix at H = h = (dashed). Unbounded orbits not shown. The center at the origin corresponds h = 0 in (5) and to the limiting physical state in which the pairs of like-vorticity are at an in nitesimal distance and rotate with a divergent frequency as described by the original Hamiltonian. Stable orbits foliate the area between this point and the critical energy level. be found from (9) and is given by Of these two roots, only J is both positive and free from singularities. Thus from here on, we set J = J (h; ). 8h 1 1 Since (13) is a canonical transformation, it preserves 2 2 T (h) = h E + 1 h K ; leapfrog 2 Hamilton's equations of motion. Therefore, evolves as 1 h h h where E and K are complete elliptic integrals of the rst d @H 1 and second kind respectively. = = 1 + 4h + 4h cos 2 dt @J 2 (15) + (1 + 2h cos 2) 1 + 4h + 4h cos 2 : IV. EXPLICIT FORM OF THE FLOQUET PROBLEM where we have used (14) to write (15) in terms of h and A. Reformulation in terms of the canonical polar angle In these variables, the Floquet matrix in (12), A(J; ), The coordinates X and Y can not be solved in closed h h is given by form. This is not a problem when nding the Floquet multipliers numerically, but it will be analytically use- ful to have an explicit form of the Floquet problem. To (2+6J) cos 2 J(5+cos 4) sin 2 ( 1+J+J cos 2)( 1 J+J cos 2) this end, we change the independent variable in a man- 2( 1 J+J cos 2) A = : (2 6J) cos 2 J(5+cos 4) sin 2 ner inspired by the proof that bounded solutions to the ( 1+J+J cos 2)( 1 J+J cos 2) 2( 1+J+J cos 2) gravitational two-body problem are ellipses. Consider (16) the canonical polar coordinates [26], p p Using (14), J can be eliminated from A(J; ) and (16) X = 2J cos ; Y = 2J sin : (13) can be written as a function A (), depending on the parameter h alone. Since This transformation preserves the Hamiltonian structure of the equations of motion, i.e. dZ () d d @H dJ @H = A ()Z (); (17) = and = : d dt dt @J dt @ We rewrite (12) as a Floquet problem with the polar angle as an independent variable. With respect to the equation (15) can be used to write this as variables and J , the Hamiltonian (5) can be rewritten as dZ () d 2J ~ ~ = A ()Z () where A () = A (): h h h H (J; ) = : 2 2 d dt 2 J 4J cos 2 + J cos 4 (18) At a given energy level H = h, we can solve for J , In what follows, we drop the tilde from this notation. In particular, at the apparent bifurcation value h = 1 + 2h cos 2 1 + 4h + 4h cos 2 J = : (14) 1=8, the coecient matrix is given by h( 1 + cos 4) 7 7+12 cos 2 4 cos 4 3 17+8 cos 2 1 sin 2 2 2 cos 2 A 1 () = p : (19) h= 3 4 cos 2 4 cos 4 17+8 cos 2 4 17 + 8 cos 2 sin 2 2+2 cos 2 An additional bene t is that in this approach, the period -dependent change of variables known as a Lyapunov is independent of h since A () = A ( + ). transformation, which we construct. First note that the h h matrix cos sin B. Numerical solution of the Floquet problem B() = ; (21) sin cos Using this explicit construction, we give two numerical is the fundamental solution matrix of the system checks for the critical value of h = . Let M be the c h dB monodromy matrix of the system (18), and de ne the = A B: function f (h) = tr M 2. We used MATLAB's built in root nder, fzero along with the ODE Solver ode45 Under the canonical change of variables W () = with a relative tolerance of 10 , an absolute tolerance B()Z (), the system (12) becomes of 10 to solve the equation f (h ) = 0. Using an ini- tial value of h = 0:1, the solver returned the numerical dW dB dZ = Z + B solution h = 0:125 to within machine error. Note that d d d constructing f (h) requires the numerical solution of the dB Floquet problem. See Fig. 5(a). = B W + BAZ Another test, which is more relevant for the approach dB 1 1 used in Sec. V, is to check that the solution to (19) has a = B + BAB W: periodic solution with an initial value of Z () = (1; 0) . In this formulation only a single system of two ODEs Letting must be integrated. Using arbitrary precision arithmetic dB and a 30th order Taylor method using the Julia package 1 1 C () = B + BAB ; TaylorIntegration.jl [27], we nd that the numerical solution satis es jjZ () Z (0)jj < 10 . This is consis- then tent with the hypothesis that Z has a periodic solution of period and that h is truly rational up to the accuracy c dW = C ()W; (22) of the simulation. See Fig. 5(b). where the rst few terms in the series C. Expansion in h C () = C + h C () (23) h 0 k k=1 The method of harmonic balance used in Sec. V re- quires that the Floquet matrix A (), with explicit h are form (18), be written as a Fourier series. To accomplish 0 2 this we expand A in a Maclaurin series in h and nd at C () = ; 0 0 each order in h a nite Fourier expansion. Letting 2 sin 2 4 cos 2 C () = ; k 4 cos 2 2 sin 2 A () = h A (); h k k=0 sin 4 8 cos 4 C () = ; 4 4 cos 4 sin 4 the rst few terms are given by 5 sin 2 sin 6 26 cos 2 + 6 cos 6 C () = ; 6 cos 2 + 6 cos 6 5 sin 2 + sin 6 sin 2 cos 2 A () = ; cos 2 sin 2 including a leading-order term that is independent of , sin 4 3 + cos 4 A () = ; 1 as desired. 3 + cos 4 sin 4 sin 2 3 sin 6 12 9 cos 2 3 cos 6 A () = : 12 + 9 cos 2 3 cos 6 sin 2 + 3 sin 6 V. METHOD OF HARMONIC BALANCE AND THE HILL'S DETERMINANT To perform a perturbation expansion, it is preferable that the leading-order term has constant-valued coe- In this section, we apply the method of harmonic bal- cients. The system can be put in such a form by a ance (MHB) to the -periodic dierential equation (22). 8 FIG. 5: (a) The trace of the monodromy matrix as a function of the energy h. (b) The periodic orbit at h = . As noted in Sec. III B, at parameter values where the of the in nite matrix H [30]. Hill's in nite determi- system undergoes a bifurcation, there must exist either nant can also be given a variational interpretation as the a periodic orbit or an anti-periodic orbit. The idea be- Hessian of the action functional evaluated at the criti- hind this method is that if such an orbit exists, then cal value given by the periodic orbit. This can provide it has a convergent Fourier series which can be found if useful information regarding the stability of the periodic an approximate solvability condition for its coecients is solution via the Morse index [31, 32]. satis ed. In this section, we provide a brief overview of the method. For a thorough classical overview, see [28]. B. Using Hill's determinant to detect bifurcations A. Hill's formula In the study of bifurcations, the vanishing of Hill's de- terminant has a natural interpretation: it is a solvability In his 1886 account of the motion of the lunar condition for the values of the parameter at which there perigee [29], Hill considered what has come to be known exists either a periodic orbit or an anti-periodic orbit, as Hill's equation which indicates that the system may undergo a change of stability. The most familiar example of an equation in x = g (t)x(t); where g (t + 2) = g(t): (24) Hill's form is Mathieu's equation, in which the coecient takes the form g = c+d cos 2t. Consider the ansatz where This can be put in the standard Floquet form (11) with the solution to (24), x(t), is periodic and has Fourier ex- 0 1 coecient matrix A(t; ) = . Hill formally g (t) 0 pansion found a relationship between the trace of the required mondromy matrix M and the coecients forming the imt Fourier series of g (t). Hill's result, in a modern nota- x(t) = x e ; x 2 C: (28) m j tion, can be summarized as follows. If g has Fourier k= 1 expansion, We will seek a solvability condition for the existence of a non-trivial solution, x(t). Putting (25) and (28) into (24) ikt g (t) = g ()e ; g 2 C; (25) k k and collecting harmonics yields the formal series k= 1 1 1 X X 2 ikt imt then the in nite matrix, H = (h ()), with compo- mk x (t) + g(t)x(t) = m + g ()e x e k m nents k= 1 m= 1 2 X k + g () mk k m 2 imt = k + g () x e h () = ; m; k 2 Z; (26) mk k m m mk k + 1 k;m= 1 where is the Kronecker delta, has determinant ij imt h ()x e = 0: mk m k;m= 1 tr(M ) 2 jH j = : (27) 2 2 (29) e + e 2 This de nes a matrix of in nite order, H () = (h ()). km Notice that if the system (24) has a periodic orbit at Consider a sequence of nite-dimensional matrices trunc parameter value , then tr(M ) = 2 and jHj = 0. H obtained by truncating this system at the N th In 1899, Poincare proved the convergence of Hill's for- harmonic, i.e., only including terms k and m such that trunc mula and gave a rigorous de nition of the determinant N k; m N . The matrix H has dimension N 9 (N) (2N + 1) (2N + 1). As N ! 1, roots of the equa- N h trunc tion jH ()j = 0 should converge to the roots of 1 0:154700538379256 jH ()j[36]. 2 0:125362196172840 3 0:125302181592097 C. Application of the method 4 0:125039391697053 . . . . . . To apply the method of harmonic balance, we write 20 0:125000000000009 the periodic solution to system (22) as a Fourier series. The following two observations allow us to simplify the form of this series. First, we observe that the rst com- TABLE I: Roots of the truncated Hill determinants. ponent of numerical solution Z () computed in Sec. IV B is an even function and the second component is an odd (1) function. Second, because it has period , its Fourier The relevant root of M = 0 can be found in closed series contains only even harmonics. Noting the de ni- (1) form, h = 2= 3 1 0:1547 , but the rest must tion of W () using (21), this implies that W () has only be found numerically. We have calculated the roots for odd harmonics in its Fourier expansion. These two facts several values of N and have tabulated them in Table I. imply that W () = ( ; ) has the following Fourier (N ) h h By a least-squares t we nd that the error, h , expansion[37] decays at a rate of about 4 . () = a (h) cos (2n 1) and (30a) h n n=1 VI. CONCLUSIONS () = b (h) sin (2n 1) : (30b) h n n=1 The present paper represents our attempt to explain the fortuitous bifurcation value. Toward that end, we We found using a trigonometric basis here to be more have derived an explicit reformulation of the stability natural than a complex exponential basis used in (28). problem, equation (18). This is achieved by a transfor- Putting this ansatz into the Floquet system (22) and col- mation used in solving the Kepler problem [22]. This lecting coecients of the harmonics formally result in an formulation allows us to pose the stability problem with in nite-dimensional matrix problem M (h)a = 0 where periodic coecients that are given exactly, whereas pre- a = [a ; b ; a ; b ; : : :] . 1 1 3 3 vious studies considered linearizing about a numerical so- To follow the approach of Hill, we need to truncate the lution. This simpli ed problem allows us to show, numer- Fourier ansatz (30) to 1 n N . Simultaneously, we ically, that there is a solution that is periodic to within truncate the series (23) to 0 k N , an error on the scale of 10 We then expand system in a Fourier-Taylor series, us- (N ) C () = C + h C (): 0 k ing the energy h as a small parameter. We employ a k=1 classical technique from the study of lunar motion due to G. W. Hill, which uses the method of harmonic balance, We therefore consider the sequence of truncated linear (N ) to derive a sequence of algebraic criteria for the stability systems M a = 0, where of the leapfrogging orbits. The roots of these polynomi- a = [a ; b ; a ; b ; : : : ; a ; b ] : N 1 1 2 2 N N als form a sequence of approximations that appears to converge exponentially to h . (N ) c This has nontrivial solutions if and only if M (h) is We had hoped that this analysis would provide insight (N ) singular, i.e., if M (h) = 0. We have automated this into a mechanism illuminating the surprising algebraic procedure in Mathematica [33] and can compute the re- critical value, perhaps in the form of an exact formula sult at arbitrary truncation order. The rst two such for the periodic orbit. We do not yet see how this is truncated systems are possible, given the coecients in equation (19). However, this approach shows an application of how ideas from the 1 + h 2 + 2h (1) 2 M = = 1 + 6h + 3h ; gravitational N -body problem can be transferred to the 2h 1 h N -vortex problem. 2 h 2 1 + h 2 + 2h + 8h h 2h 2h For example, several generalizations of the leapfrog- 2 2 h 2h 4h 1 h 2h + 2h h + ging solution exist and may be amenable to the tech- (2) M = h 2 2 niques discussed here. First, leapfrogging solutions ex- h 2h 2h 3 2 + 8h ist for quartets consisting of two pairs with vorticities 2 h 2 2h + 2h h + 4h 3 + + = and = . This reduces to the case 1 1 2 2 4 5 + + 977h 1049h studied here when = . In the more general case 2 3 1 2 = 9 54h 109h 210h + the critical energy level should now depend on the ra- 2 2 6 8 tio of the vorticities, = . Acheson reports that he 75h 11233h 7 2 + + 1074h + : has investigated this situation numerically through di- 2 16 10 rect simulations [15]. He makes a few observations about solutions, but their stability has not been analyzed [35]. the behavior and suggests that it would be worthwhile Finally, we remark that we have not addressed the to conduct a systematic analysis. We believe the semi- question of nonlinear dynamics of linearly unstable analytic method here is especially well suited for such as leapfrogging orbits, for example the transition from analysis as it will allow us to build the stability curves in leapfrogging to walkabout and braiding orbits and even (h; ) space. disintegration and escape. This will be the topic of an Another generalization is that leapfrogging solutions upcoming paper. exist for a system of 2N vortices with N > 2, half with vorticity +1 and half with vorticity 1. As the leapfrog- ging of four vortices models the leapfrogging of two vor- tex rings, so the leapfrogging of 2N vortices models the Acknowledgments leapfrogging of N vortex rings, a problem that has been studied experimentally in super
uid helium. The latter system has been studied by Wacks et al. [34]. While they We thank Panos Kevrekidis for introducing us to this found the motion to be stable in their numerical simu- problem in a conversation made possible by a 2015 work- lations, reduction to an ODE system would allow the shop at Dalhousie University sponsored by AARMS and exploration of a larger volume of parameter space and arranged by Theodore Kolokolnikov, and for many sub- the application of more theoretical tools. A third gener- sequent discussions. We thank Stefanella Boatto, Alain alization is to consider a system of vortices con ned to a Brizard, Jared Bronski, Kevin Mitchell, Gareth Roberts, sphere, in this case, the leapfrogging solution is symmet- Vered Rom-Kedar, Spencer Smith, and Cristina Stoica ric about a great circle. P. Newton has simulated these for additional useful discussions. [1] H. von Helmholtz, J. Reine Angew. Math 55, 25 (1858). (1960). [2] P. K. Newton, The N -Vortex Problem: Analytical Tech- [20] B. Whitchurch, P. G. Kevrekidis, and V. Koukouloyan- niques, Applied Mathematical Sciences (Springer New nis, Phys. Rev. Fluids 3, 014401 (2018). York, 2013), ISBN 9781468492903. [21] N. Rott, J. Appl. Math. Phys. (ZAMP) 40, 473 (1989). [3] H. Aref, Journal of Mathematical Physics 48, 065401 [22] J. V. Jose and E. J. Saletan, Classical Dynamics: A Con- (2007), ISSN 0022-2488. temporary Approach (Cambridge University Press, 1998). [4] H. Aref, Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 24, 1 (2010), ISSN [23] R. Kaushal and H. Korsch, Phys. Lett. A 276, 47 (2000), 1432-2250. ISSN 0375-9601. [5] G. Kirchho, Vorlesungen ub er mathematische Physik: [24] G. Floquet, in Annales scienti ques de l'Ecole normale Mechanik, vol. 1 of Vorlesungen ub er mathematische sup erieure (1883), vol. 12, pp. 47{88. Physik (Teubner, Leipzig, 1876). [25] V. Yakubovich and V. Starzhinskii, Linear Dierential [6] H. Aref, N. Rott, and H. Thomann, Annu. Rev. Fluid Equations with Periodic Coecients Vol. 1 (John Wiley Mech. 24, 1 (1992), ISSN 0066-4189. and Sons, 1975). [7] B. Eckhardt and H. Aref, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, [26] K. Meyer, G. Hall, and D. On, Introduction to Hamil- Ser. A (1988). tonian Dynamical Systems and the N-body Problem [8] H. Aref, Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics (Springer, 2008). (1989). [27] J. A. Prez-Hernndez and L. Benet, [9] M. H. Anderson, J. R. Ensher, M. R. Matthews, C. E. PerezHz/TaylorIntegration.jl: TaylorIntegration v0.4.1 Wieman, and E. A. Cornell, Science 269, 198 (1995). (2019), URL https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo. [10] M. R. Matthews, B. P. Anderson, P. C. Haljan, D. S. 2562353. Hall, C. E. Wieman, and E. A. Cornell, Phys. Rev. Lett. [28] E. T. Whittaker and G. N. Watson, A Course of Modern 83, 2498 (1999). Analysis (Cambridge University Press, 1902). [11] R. Navarro, R. Carretero-Gonz alez, P. J. Torres, P. G. [29] G. W. Hill, Acta Math. 8, 1 (1886), ISSN 0001-5962. Kevrekidis, D. J. Frantzeskakis, M. W. Ray, E. Altunta s, [30] H. Poincar e, Les m ethodes nouvelles de la m ecanique and D. S. Hall, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 225301 (2013). c eleste. Tome III (Gauthier-Villars, 1899). [12] W. Gr obli, Ph.D. thesis, Georg-August-Universit at [31] D. Treschev, O. Zubelevich, D. Treschev, and O. Zubele- G ottingen (1877). vich, Introduction to the Perturbation Theory of Hamilto- [13] A. E. H. Love, Proc. London Math. Soc. 1, 185 (1893). nian Systems (Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2009). [14] A. V. Borisov, A. A. Kilin, and I. S. Mamaev, Discrete [32] S. Bolotin and D. Treschev, Russ. Math. Surv. 65, 191 Contin. Dyn. Syst. 54, 100 (2005), ISSN 1078-0947. (2010), ISSN 0036-0279. [15] D. J. Acheson, Eur. J. Phys. 21, 269 (2000), ISSN 0143- [33] Wolfram Research, Inc., Mathematica, Version 12.0 0807. (2019), champaign, IL. [16] L. Tophj and H. Aref, Phys. Fluids 20, 093605 (2008), [34] D. H. Wacks, A. W. Baggaley, and C. F. Barenghi, Phys. ISSN 1070-6631. Fluids 26, 027102 (2014). [17] L. Tophj and H. Aref, Phys. Fluids 25, 014107 (2013), [35] P. K. Newton and H. Shokraneh, Proc. R. Soc. London, ISSN 1070-6631. Ser. A 464, 1525 (2008), ISSN 1364-5021. [18] J. D. Meiss, Dierential Dynamical Systems (SIAM, [36] Note that equations (26) and (29) dier by a factor of Philadelphia, 2007). . This is a regularization factor to guarantee h = 1 jj 1+k [19] L. Markus and H. Yamabe, Osaka J. Math. 12, 305 and is necessary for (27) to converge. 11 [37] This expansion contains only one-fourth of the possible factors into several terms. Of these terms, only the one non-zeros terms, and was based on mere observation from corresponding to the above expansion ever vanishes, so numerical simulations. It would of course be possible to that no generality has been lost. proceed with a more general Fourier ansatz. We have done this, and found that the computed Hill determinant
http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.pngNonlinear SciencesarXiv (Cornell University)http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/arxiv-cornell-university/stability-of-leapfrogging-vortex-pairs-a-semi-analytic-approach-wiH0ICiQLn
Stability of Leapfrogging Vortex Pairs: A Semi-analytic Approach