
Scientists have uncovered evidence of classic turbulence occurring within swarms of rising gas bubbles.
An international team of scientists from the Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (HZDR), Johns Hopkins University, and Duke University has found that a classic theory describing turbulence in fluids also explains how bubbles rising through water create chaotic motion. Their study, which tracked both bubbles and surrounding fluid particles in three dimensions, offers the first direct experimental confirmation that “Kolmogorov scaling” can appear in turbulence driven by bubbles. The findings were published in Physical Review Letters.
Turbulence caused by bubbles is common in everyday life and industry, from fizzing beverages to chemical reactors and ocean waves. When many bubbles rise through a liquid, the motion of their wakes stirs the surrounding water into a turbulent flow.
Understanding this process is vital for advancing industrial technologies, refining climate models, and improving designs that rely on mixing fluids. For decades, however, scientists have debated whether the turbulence theory developed in 1941 by Russian mathematician Andrey Kolmogorov, known as “K41 scaling,” applies to these bubbly systems. Earlier experiments and computer simulations had produced conflicting results, leaving the question unresolved until now.
”We wanted to get a definitive answer by looking closely at the turbulence between and around bubbles, at very small scales,” says Dr. Tian Ma, lead author of the study and physicist at the Institute of Fluid Dynamics at HZDR.
To accomplish this, the researchers employed an advanced method known as 3D simultaneous Lagrangian tracking of both phases. This approach enables scientists to monitor the motion of bubbles and the tiny tracer particles in the surrounding water with exceptional accuracy and in real time. The experiment took place in a water column measuring 11.5 cm in width, where carefully controlled swarms of bubbles were released from the bottom. Four high-speed cameras captured the motion at a rate of 2,500 frames per second.
They studied four different cases, varying the bubble size and the amount of gas, to replicate realistic bubbly flows. Importantly, the bubbles with three to five millimeters in diameter were large enough to wobble as they rose, creating strong turbulent wakes. In two of the four cases – those with moderate bubble size and density – the turbulence in the flow closely followed Kolmogorov’s predictions at small scales, that is, for eddies smaller than the size of the bubbles. This marks the first time such scaling has been confirmed experimentally in the midst of a bubble swarm.
Decoding turbulence: energy cascades from big to small
”Kolmogorov’s theory is elegant. It predicts how the energy that cascades from big turbulent eddies down to smaller and smaller ones – until it’s eventually dissipated through viscous effects – controls the fluctuations of the turbulent fluid motion,” explains co-author Dr. Andrew Bragg from Duke University. ”Finding that this theory also describes bubble-driven turbulence so well is both surprising and exciting.”
The team also developed a new mathematical formula to estimate the rate at which turbulence loses energy due to viscous effects – known as the energy dissipation rate. Their formula, which only depends on two bubble-related parameters – its size and how densely packed the bubbles are – matched the experimental data remarkably well. Interestingly, they found that Kolmogorov scaling was stronger in regions outside the bubbles’ direct wakes. In those wakes, the fluid is so strongly disturbed that the classic turbulent energy cascade is overpowered.
One crucial insight was that for the classic Kolmogorov ”inertial range“ – where his scaling laws work best – to appear clearly in bubble-induced turbulence, the bubbles would need to be significantly larger. But there’s a catch: in reality, bubbles of such large sizes would break apart due to their own instability. This means there is a fundamental limit to how well the K41 theory can apply to bubbly flows. ”In a way, nature prevents us from getting perfect Kolmogorov turbulence with bubbles. But under the right conditions, we now know it gets close,” says Dr. Hendrik Hessenkemper, a co-author on the study who performed the experiments.
The findings not only settle an ongoing scientific debate but could also help engineers better design bubble-based systems, from chemical reactors to wastewater treatment. And for physicists, it adds another system – bubbly flows – to the growing list of chaotic phenomena where Kolmogorov’s 1941 theory proves surprisingly robust.
The researchers emphasize that their study is just the beginning. Future work could investigate how turbulence behaves with even more complex bubble shapes, bubble mixtures, or under different gravitational or fluid conditions. ”The more we understand the fundamental rules of turbulence in bubbly flows, the better we can harness them in real-world applications,” summarizes Ma. ”And it’s pretty amazing that a theory from over 80 years ago continues to hold up in such a bubbly environment.”
Reference: “Kolmogorov Scaling in Bubble-Induced Turbulence” by Tian Ma, Shiyong Tan, Rui Ni, Hendrik Hessenkemper and Andrew D. Bragg, 20 June 2025, Physical Review Letters.
DOI: 10.1103/v9mh-7pw1
Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.
Follow us on Google and Google News.
4 Comments
In a way, nature prevents us from getting perfect Kolmogorov turbulence with bubbles.
WHY? WHY? WHY?
Please ask researchers to think deeply:
1. Why is ideal fluid involved in the study of fluid mechanics?
2. Why has contemporary physics fallen into the quagmire of pseudoscience?
3. Is Physical Review Letters a publication that respects science?
Topological vortex theory (TVT), one of the central concepts in modern condensed matter physics and field theory, describes stable structures with topological protection that emerge in complex systems. These structures, from skyrmions in quantum materials to spacetime defects in cosmology, exhibit extraordinary robustness and rich dynamic behaviors. Meanwhile, artificial intelligence (AI), particularly machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL), is reshaping the process of scientific discovery in unprecedented ways. This fusion will catalyze a new paradigm of scientific research characterized by “data-driven” and “intelligent emergence”.
—— Excerpted from https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/1952376143765309335.
When we pursue the ultimate truth of all things, the space in which our bodies and all things exist may itself be the final and deepest puzzle we need to explore. This is not only the pursuit of physics, but also the most magnificent exploration of the origin of the universe by human reason.
Based on the Topological Vortex Theory (TVT), space is an uniformly incompressible physical entity. Space-time vortices are the products of topological phase transitions of the tipping points in space, are the point defects in spacetime. Point defects do not only impact the thermodynamic properties, but are also central to kinetic processes. They create all things and shape the world through spin and self-organization.
In today’s physics, some so-called peer-reviewed journals—including Physical Review Letters, Nature, Science, and others—stubbornly insist on and promote the following:
1. Even though θ and τ particles exhibit differences in experiments, physics can claim they are the same particle. This is science.
2. Even though topological vortices and antivortices have identical structures and opposite rotational directions, physics can define their structures and directions as entirely different. This is science.
3. Even though two sets of cobalt-60 rotate in opposite directions and experiments reveal asymmetry, physics can still define them as mirror images of each other. This is science.
4. Even though vortex structures are ubiquitous—from cosmic accretion disks to particle spins—physics must insist that vortex structures do not exist and require verification. Only the particles that like God, Demonic, or Angelic are the most fundamental structures of the universe. This is science.
5. Even though everything occupies space and maintains its existence in time, physics must still debate and insist on whether space exists and whether time is a figment of the human mind. This is science.
6. Even though space, with its non-stick, incompressible, and isotropic characteristics, provides a solid foundation for the development of physics, physics must still insist that the ideal fluid properties of space do not exist. This is science.
and go on.
Is this the counterintuitive science they widely promote? Compromising with pseudo academic publications and peer review by pseudo scholars is an insult to science and public intelligence. Some so-called scholars no longer understand what shame is. The study of Topological Vortex Theory (TVT) reminds us that the most profound problems in physics often lie at the intersection of different theories. By exploring these border regions, we can not only resolve contradictions in existing theories but also discover new physical phenomena and application possibilities.
Under the topological vortex architecture, it is highly challenging for even two hydrogen atoms or two quarks to be perfectly symmetrical, let alone counter-rotating two sets of cobalt-60. Contemporary physics and so-called peer-reviewed publications (including Physical Review Letters, Science, Nature, etc.) stubbornly believe that two sets of counter rotating cobalt-60 are two mirror images of each other, constructing a more shocking pseudoscientific theoretical framework in the history of science than the “geocentric model”. This pseudo scientific framework and system have seriously hindered scientific progress and social development.
For nearly a century, physics has been manipulated by this pseudo scientific theoretical system and the interest groups behind it, wasting a lot of manpower, funds, and time. A large amount of pseudo scientific research has been conducted, and countless pseudo scientific papers have been published, causing serious negative impacts on scientific and social progress, as well as humanistic development.
Complexity does not necessarily mean that there is no logical and architectural framework to follow. Mathematics is the language and tool that reveals the motion of spacetime, rather than the motion itself. Although the physical form of spacetime vortices is extremely simple, their interaction patterns are highly complex, and we must develop more and richer mathematical languages to describe and understand them.
The development of the Topological Vortex Theory (TVT) reflects a progression from concrete physical phenomena to abstract mathematical modeling and, ultimately, to interdisciplinary unification.
——Excerpted from https://t.pineal.cn/blogs/4569/An-Overview-of-the-Development-of-Topological-Vortex-Theory-TVT.
B Memo 2511180314_Source 1. Reinterpretation Storytelling 【】
Source 1.
https://scitechdaily.com/turbulent-bubbles-confirm-a-century-old-physics-theory/
1.
_Turbulent bubbles confirm a century-old physics theory.
2-2.
_”Kolmogorov’s theory is sophisticated. It predicts how energy controls the fluctuations of turbulent fluid motion, flowing from large turbulent eddies into smaller and smaller eddies until it is finally dissipated through viscous effects,” explains co-author Dr. Andrew Bragg of Duke University.
“It’s surprising and fascinating that this theory also explains bubble-induced turbulence so well.”
[I interpret turbulence theory as a tool to explain [how msbase.mbshell was formed from qpeoms.qqcell].
>>> Large turbulence shrinks and dissipates due to viscous effects? This phenomenon is quite common. Any turbulence or entropy is aggregated into clumps of viscous modes and dissipated all at once.
Larger bubbles and larger nk.loafs imply larger equations and require higher-resolution qqcells for larger nqvixer modes.
】
_The research team also developed a new mathematical formula to estimate the rate at which turbulence loses energy due to viscous effects, or the energy dissipation rate. This formula, which depends only on two bubble-related parameters—bubble size and bubble density—matched experimental data remarkably well.
_Interestingly, Kolmogorov scaling was stronger outside the bubble’s immediate wake. In these wakes, the fluid is so strongly disturbed that the classical turbulent energy cascade is overwhelmed.
2-3. One key insight was that the classical Kolmogorov “inertial range”—where his scaling laws best apply—must be significantly larger for bubble-induced turbulence to be clearly visible.
However, there’s a catch: In practice, bubbles that large will likely break up due to their own instability. This means there’s a fundamental limit to how well the K41 theory can be applied to bubble flows.
3.
“In some ways, nature prevents us from achieving perfect Kolmogorov turbulence in bubbles. But we’ve found that under the right conditions, we can get close to it,” says Dr. Hendrik Hessenkemper, co-author of the study that conducted the experiments.
[Large bubbles are large, mobile, and have a higher qqcell unit.]
>>> Kolmogorov turbulence could be some kind of eddy turbulence, possibly in the form of a mbshell. Nature induces viscous mass transfer in such large bubbles, forming a binary 1106=1007. This results in sample2.qqcell.unit(*).
For reference,
[Kolmogorov turbulence theory, proposed by Russian mathematician Andrei Kolmogorov,
statistically analyzes turbulence and explains physical variables such as velocity and pressure as probability variables. According to this theory, turbulent energy begins in large-scale eddies and gradually transfers to smaller-scale eddies, dissipating as heat energy in the smallest eddies due to viscous friction. During this process, the energy spectrum follows certain laws, the most representative of which is the law that states that the energy spectrum during turbulent energy transfer is proportional to the wavenumber raised to the power of -5/3. Kolmogorov scale: The smallest eddy in turbulent flow where energy dissipates into heat, the smallest unit of energy.
>>>>[A large bubble creates two low-mass bubble stars, a similar binary star.]
>>> The collapse of the large bubble appears to be a rearrangement of mass in the already completed msbase, so it is not a result of the mbshell process. The large bubble is a [mass transfer(*) of the binary star].
This is the [origin of sample2.qqcell], which attracts dark energy. Oh my.
sample2.qoms(standard)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1=2,0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
>>>>>When the bubbles are pushed from qqcell to mbshell, the mass (the number of 1s) is calculated. Stars (k) with n are formed.
>>> From qqcell.particles, bubble mass (mass.base_unit.kind), mbshell, are constantly formed, and when they swarm, they form a chaotic nebula of gas.
>>> This nebula forms stars directly in the msbase.galaxy.system, a cluster of stars called msbase4.stars.01020304050608080910111213141516.nk2.
exemple1.
04110713
14051203
15080902
01100716
】
_These findings not only settle the ongoing scientific debate, but could also help engineers design more efficient bubble-based systems, from chemical reactors to wastewater treatment.
_For physicists, this adds another system—bubble flow—to the growing list of chaotic phenomena that demonstrate the remarkable power of Kolmogorov’s 1941 theory.
3-1.
_The researchers emphasize that this study is just the beginning. Future research could explore how turbulence behaves in even more complex bubble shapes, bubble mixtures, or under varying gravity and fluid conditions.
_Professor Ma summarized, “The better we understand the fundamental laws of turbulence in bubble flows, the better we can utilize them in practical applications.” He added, “It’s quite remarkable that a theory that’s over 80 years old still holds true in such a bubble-rich environment.”