The Multiple Scattering Theory of Masson and LeBlond: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=Introduction= | {{complete pages}} | ||
== Introduction== | |||
The scattering theory of [[Masson_LeBlond_1989a| Masson and LeBlond 1989]] was the first | The scattering theory of [[Masson_LeBlond_1989a| Masson and LeBlond 1989]] was the first | ||
Line 14: | Line 16: | ||
[[Meylan_Masson_2006a | Meylan and Masson 2006]] showed the equivalence | [[Meylan_Masson_2006a | Meylan and Masson 2006]] showed the equivalence | ||
of | of the multiple scattering theory of Masson and LeBlond with the | ||
[[Linear Boltzmann Model for Wave Scattering in the MIZ]] | [[Linear Boltzmann Model for Wave Scattering in the MIZ]] | ||
and this is included the final section. | and this is included the final section. | ||
= Equation for Wave Scattering= | == Equation for Wave Scattering== | ||
[[ | [[Masson and LeBlond 1989]] began | ||
with the following equation for the evolution of wave scattering, | with the following equation for the evolution of wave scattering, | ||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
\frac{\partial I}{\partial t}+c_{g}\hat{\theta}\nabla | \frac{\partial I}{\partial t}+c_{g}\hat{\theta}\nabla | ||
Line 30: | Line 32: | ||
}+S_{{\mathrm{ice}}}, | }+S_{{\mathrm{ice}}}, | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
where <math>S_{\mathrm{{in}}}</math> is the input of wave energy due | where <math>S_{\mathrm{{in}}}</math> is the input of wave energy due | ||
to wind forcing, <math>S_{\mathrm{{ds}}}</math> is the dissipation of wave | to wind forcing, <math>S_{\mathrm{{ds}}}</math> is the dissipation of wave | ||
energy due to wave breaking, <math>S_{\mathrm{{nl}}}</math> is the non-linear transfer | energy due to wave breaking, <math>S_{\mathrm{{nl}}}</math> is the non-linear transfer | ||
of wave energy and <math>S_{\mathrm{{ice}}}</math> is the wave scattering. | of wave energy and <math>S_{\mathrm{{ice}}}</math> is the wave scattering. | ||
[[Masson and LeBlond 1989]] | |||
solved this in the isotropic (no spatial | |||
solved | |||
dependence) case. Furthermore, they did not actually determine | dependence) case. Furthermore, they did not actually determine | ||
<math>S_{\mathrm{{ice}}}</math> but derived a time stepping procedure to solve the | <math>S_{\mathrm{{ice}}}</math> but derived a time stepping procedure to solve the | ||
isotropic solution using multiple scattering. We will derive <math>S_{\mathrm{{ice}}}</math> | isotropic solution using multiple scattering. We will derive <math>S_{\mathrm{{ice}}}</math> | ||
from | from the time stepping equation. | ||
[[Masson and LeBlond 1989]] derived the following difference equation | |||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
I(f_{n},\theta;t+\Delta t)=[\mathbf{T}]_{f_{n}}[I(f_{n},\theta | I(f_{n},\theta;t+\Delta t)=[\mathbf{T}]_{f_{n}}[I(f_{n},\theta | ||
Line 53: | Line 51: | ||
t] | t] | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
where <math>f_{n}</math> is the wave frequency | where <math>f_{n}</math> is the wave frequency | ||
([[ | ([[Masson and LeBlond 1989|Masson and LeBlond 1989 equation (51)]]. It is important to realise that | ||
<math>[\mathbf{T}]_{f_{n}}</math> is a | <math>[\mathbf{T}]_{f_{n}}</math> is a | ||
function of | function of | ||
Line 66: | Line 64: | ||
angle <math>\theta</math> into <math>n</math> evenly spaced angles <math>\theta_{i}</math> between <math>-\pi</math> | angle <math>\theta</math> into <math>n</math> evenly spaced angles <math>\theta_{i}</math> between <math>-\pi</math> | ||
and <math>\pi</math>. <math>[\mathbf{T}]_{f_{n}}</math> is then given by | and <math>\pi</math>. <math>[\mathbf{T}]_{f_{n}}</math> is then given by | ||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
(T_{ij})_{f_{n}}=A^{2}\{\hat{\beta}|D(\theta_{ij})|^{2}\Delta | (T_{ij})_{f_{n}}=A^{2}\{\hat{\beta}|D(\theta_{ij})|^{2}\Delta | ||
Line 73: | Line 71: | ||
\}, | \}, | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
where <math>\theta_{ij}=|(\theta_{i}-\theta_{j})|</math> | where <math>\theta_{ij}=|(\theta_{i}-\theta_{j})|</math> | ||
([[Masson_LeBlond_1989a| Masson and LeBlond 1989]], equation | ([[Masson_LeBlond_1989a| Masson and LeBlond 1989]], equation (42)). <math>\hat{\beta}</math> | ||
is a function of <math>\Delta t</math> | |||
given by | given by | ||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
\hat{\beta}=\int_{0}^{c_{g}\Delta t}\rho_{e}(r)dr, | \hat{\beta}=\int_{0}^{c_{g}\Delta t}\rho_{e}(r)dr, | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
([[ | ([[Masson and LeBlond 1989]] p. 68). The function <math>\rho_{e}(r)</math> gives the ''effective'' number of floes per unit | ||
area effectively radiating waves under the single scattering approximation | area effectively radiating waves under the single scattering approximation | ||
which is to assume that the amplitude of a wave scattered | which is to assume that the amplitude of a wave scattered | ||
more than once is negligible. It is given by | more than once is negligible. It is given by | ||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
\rho_{e}(r)=\frac{2}{\sqrt{3}D_{\mathrm{{av}}}^{2}\left( 1-\frac{8a^{2}}{\sqrt | \rho_{e}(r)=\frac{2}{\sqrt{3}D_{\mathrm{{av}}}^{2}\left( 1-\frac{8a^{2}}{\sqrt | ||
Line 96: | Line 91: | ||
{3}D_{\mathrm{{av}}}^{2}}\right) ^{r/2a}, | {3}D_{\mathrm{{av}}}^{2}}\right) ^{r/2a}, | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
([[ | ([[Masson and LeBlond 1989]] equation (29), | ||
although there is a typographical error in their equation which we have corrected) | although there is a typographical error in their equation which we have corrected) | ||
where <math>D_{av}</math> is the average floe spacing and <math>a</math> is the floe radius | where <math>D_{av}</math> is the average floe spacing and <math>a</math> is the floe radius | ||
(remembering that [[ | (remembering that [[Masson and LeBlond 1989]] considered circular floes). | ||
The energy factor <math>A</math> is | The energy factor <math>A</math> is | ||
given by, | given by, | ||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
A=(1+|\alpha_{c}D(0)|^{2}+|\alpha_{c}D(\pi)|^{2}+\hat{\beta}\int_{0}^{2\pi | A=(1+|\alpha_{c}D(0)|^{2}+|\alpha_{c}D(\pi)|^{2}+\hat{\beta}\int_{0}^{2\pi | ||
}|D(\theta)|^{2}d\theta+f_{d})^{-\frac{1}{2}}, | }|D(\theta)|^{2}d\theta+f_{d})^{-\frac{1}{2}}, | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
([[ | ([[Masson and LeBlond 1989]] equation (52)) where the term | ||
<math>f_{d}</math> represents dissipation and is given by | <math>f_{d}</math> represents dissipation and is given by | ||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
f_{d}=e^{\frac{f_{i}}{A_{f}}\sigma_{a}c_{g}\Delta t}-1, | f_{d}=e^{\frac{f_{i}}{A_{f}}\sigma_{a}c_{g}\Delta t}-1, | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
([[ | ([[Masson and LeBlond 1989]] equation (53)) and <math>\alpha_{c}</math>, the ''coherent'' scattering coefficient, is given by | ||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
\alpha_{c}=\left( \frac{2\pi}{k}\right) ^{1/2}\exp\left( \frac | \alpha_{c}=\left( \frac{2\pi}{k}\right) ^{1/2}\exp\left( \frac | ||
Line 125: | Line 120: | ||
^{x_{s}/2a}dx_{s}. | ^{x_{s}/2a}dx_{s}. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
It should be noted that the upper limit of integration for <math>\alpha_{c}</math> | It should be noted that the upper limit of integration for <math>\alpha_{c}</math> | ||
was given as infinity in [[ | was given as infinity in [[Masson and LeBlond 1989]]. This is appropriate in the steady case | ||
only; it should have been changed to <math>c_{g}\Delta t</math> in the time dependent case. However, this correction | only; it should have been changed to <math>c_{g}\Delta t</math> in the time dependent case. However, this correction | ||
leads to only negligible quantitative changes to the results. | leads to only negligible quantitative changes to the results. | ||
We will transform the | We will transform the scattering operator <math>\mathbf{T}</math> by | ||
taking the limit as the number of angles used to discretise <math>\theta</math> tends to | taking the limit as the number of angles used to discretise <math>\theta</math> tends to | ||
infinity. On taking this limit, the operator <math>\mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right) </math> | infinity. On taking this limit, the operator <math>\mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right) </math> | ||
becomes | becomes | ||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
\mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right) I\left( \theta\right) =A^{2}\{\hat{\beta | \mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right) I\left( \theta\right) =A^{2}\{\hat{\beta | ||
Line 141: | Line 136: | ||
}\right) d\theta^{\prime}+ I\left( \theta\right) \}. | }\right) d\theta^{\prime}+ I\left( \theta\right) \}. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
The scattering theory of [[Masson and LeBlond 1989]] depends on the | |||
The scattering theory of [[ | |||
values of the time step <math>\Delta t</math> and the correct solution | values of the time step <math>\Delta t</math> and the correct solution | ||
is found for small time steps. We will now | is found for small time steps. We will now | ||
Line 151: | Line 145: | ||
there is a considerable simplification in the form of the equation. | there is a considerable simplification in the form of the equation. | ||
Since | Since | ||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
I(t+\Delta t)=\mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right) I\mathbf{(}t), | I(t+\Delta t)=\mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right) I\mathbf{(}t), | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
we obtain the following expression for the time derivative of < | we obtain the following expression for the time derivative of <math>I</math>, | ||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
\frac{\partial I}{\partial t}=\lim_{\Delta t\rightarrow0}\left( | \frac{\partial I}{\partial t}=\lim_{\Delta t\rightarrow0}\left( | ||
\frac{\mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right)I(t) - I(t)}{\Delta t}\right). | \frac{\mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right)I(t) - I(t)}{\Delta t}\right). | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
We can calculate this limit as follows, | We can calculate this limit as follows, | ||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
\lim_{\Delta t\rightarrow0}\left( \frac{\mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right)I(t) | \lim_{\Delta t\rightarrow0}\left( \frac{\mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right)I(t) | ||
Line 172: | Line 166: | ||
\theta\right) \}-I\left( \theta\right) }{\Delta t}\right) | \theta\right) \}-I\left( \theta\right) }{\Delta t}\right) | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
=c_{g}\rho_{e}\left( 0\right) \int | =c_{g}\rho_{e}\left( 0\right) \int | ||
Line 179: | Line 174: | ||
|D(\theta-\theta^{\prime})|^{2}d\theta^{\prime}+\frac{f_{i}}{A_{f}}\sigma_{a}c_{g}I\left( \theta\right). | |D(\theta-\theta^{\prime})|^{2}d\theta^{\prime}+\frac{f_{i}}{A_{f}}\sigma_{a}c_{g}I\left( \theta\right). | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
We can simplify equation | We can simplify this equation. | ||
The value of <math>\rho_{e}\left( 0\right)</math> is given by | The value of <math>\rho_{e}\left( 0\right)</math> is given by | ||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
\rho_{e}\left( 0\right) =\frac{2}{\sqrt{3}D_{\mathrm{{av}}}^{2}\left( | \rho_{e}\left( 0\right) =\frac{2}{\sqrt{3}D_{\mathrm{{av}}}^{2}\left( | ||
Line 188: | Line 183: | ||
=\frac{f_{i}}{A_{f}\sqrt{1-4f_{i}/\pi}}, | =\frac{f_{i}}{A_{f}\sqrt{1-4f_{i}/\pi}}, | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
where we have used the fact that <math>f_{i}=2\pi a^{2}/\sqrt{3}D_{av}^{2}</math> and | where we have used the fact that <math>f_{i}=2\pi a^{2}/\sqrt{3}D_{av}^{2}</math> and | ||
<math>A_{f}=\pi a^{2}</math>. | <math>A_{f}=\pi a^{2}</math>. | ||
= Equivalence with Linear Boltzmann Model= | == Equivalence with Linear Boltzmann Model== | ||
We show here that the equation above is very similar to the equation | |||
derived in [[Linear Boltzmann Model for Wave Scattering in the MIZ]]. | |||
If we substitute our expressions for <math>\rho_e(0)</math> | If we substitute our expressions for <math>\rho_e(0)</math> | ||
iand | |||
include the spatial term | include the spatial term | ||
(which was not in [[Masson_LeBlond_1989a| Masson and LeBlond 1989]] since they assumed | (which was not in [[Masson_LeBlond_1989a| Masson and LeBlond 1989]] since they assumed | ||
isotropy) and divide by <math>c_g</math>, we obtain the following | isotropy) and divide by <math>c_g</math>, we obtain the following | ||
linear Boltzmann equation | linear Boltzmann equation | ||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
\frac{1}{c_g}\frac{\partial I}{\partial t}+\hat{\theta}.\nabla I | \frac{1}{c_g}\frac{\partial I}{\partial t}+\hat{\theta}.\nabla I | ||
Line 207: | Line 204: | ||
})|^{2}I\left( \theta^{\prime}\right) d\theta^{\prime} | })|^{2}I\left( \theta^{\prime}\right) d\theta^{\prime} | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
<center> | |||
<math> | <math> | ||
- \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-4f_{i}/\pi}} | - \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-4f_{i}/\pi}} | ||
Line 214: | Line 212: | ||
\right)I\left( \theta\right). | \right)I\left( \theta\right). | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
</center> | |||
If we compare this equations with | If we compare this equations with | ||
the equivalent equation in [[Linear Boltzmann Model for Wave Scattering in the MIZ]] | the equivalent equation in [[Linear Boltzmann Model for Wave Scattering in the MIZ]] | ||
Line 221: | Line 219: | ||
This difference comes from the fact that, in [[Masson_LeBlond_1989a| Masson and LeBlond 1989]], multiple | This difference comes from the fact that, in [[Masson_LeBlond_1989a| Masson and LeBlond 1989]], multiple | ||
scattering is neglected by using an effective density, <math>\rho_{e}</math>, | scattering is neglected by using an effective density, <math>\rho_{e}</math>, | ||
in lieu of the number density <math>\rho_{o}</math>. | in lieu of the number density <math>\rho_{o}</math>. | ||
The effective density is related to the number density as <math> \rho_{e}(0) = \rho_{o}/ | |||
is related to the number density as <math> \rho_{e}(0) = \rho_{o}/ | |||
\sqrt{1-4f_{i}/\pi}</math>. | \sqrt{1-4f_{i}/\pi}</math>. | ||
[[Category: Wave Scattering in the Marginal Ice Zone]] |
Latest revision as of 01:42, 17 February 2010
Introduction
The scattering theory of Masson and LeBlond 1989 was the first model which properly accounted for the three dimensional scattering which occurs in the MIZ. The model was derived using multiple scattering and was presented in terms of a time step discretisation and only for ice floes with a circular geometry. Their scattering theory included the effects of wind generation, nonlinear coupling in frequency and wave breaking. However, what was original in their work was their equation for the scattering of wave energy by ice floes.
Meylan and Masson 2006 showed the equivalence of the multiple scattering theory of Masson and LeBlond with the Linear Boltzmann Model for Wave Scattering in the MIZ and this is included the final section.
Equation for Wave Scattering
Masson and LeBlond 1989 began with the following equation for the evolution of wave scattering,
[math]\displaystyle{ \frac{\partial I}{\partial t}+c_{g}\hat{\theta}\nabla I= \left(S_{\mathrm{in}}+S_{{\mathrm{ds}}}\right) \left(1-f_{i}\right) +S_{{\mathrm{nl}} }+S_{{\mathrm{ice}}}, }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ S_{\mathrm{{in}}} }[/math] is the input of wave energy due to wind forcing, [math]\displaystyle{ S_{\mathrm{{ds}}} }[/math] is the dissipation of wave energy due to wave breaking, [math]\displaystyle{ S_{\mathrm{{nl}}} }[/math] is the non-linear transfer of wave energy and [math]\displaystyle{ S_{\mathrm{{ice}}} }[/math] is the wave scattering. Masson and LeBlond 1989 solved this in the isotropic (no spatial dependence) case. Furthermore, they did not actually determine [math]\displaystyle{ S_{\mathrm{{ice}}} }[/math] but derived a time stepping procedure to solve the isotropic solution using multiple scattering. We will derive [math]\displaystyle{ S_{\mathrm{{ice}}} }[/math] from the time stepping equation.
Masson and LeBlond 1989 derived the following difference equation
[math]\displaystyle{ I(f_{n},\theta;t+\Delta t)=[\mathbf{T}]_{f_{n}}[I(f_{n},\theta ;t)+((S_{\mathrm{in}}+S_{\mathrm{ds}})(1-f_{i})+S_{\mathrm{nl}})\Delta t] }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ f_{n} }[/math] is the wave frequency (Masson and LeBlond 1989 equation (51). It is important to realise that [math]\displaystyle{ [\mathbf{T}]_{f_{n}} }[/math] is a function of [math]\displaystyle{ \Delta t }[/math] in the above equation. We are interested only in the wave scattering term so we will set the terms due to wind input ([math]\displaystyle{ S_{\mathrm{{in}}} }[/math]), wave breaking ([math]\displaystyle{ S_{\mathrm{{ds}}} }[/math]) and non-linear coupling ([math]\displaystyle{ S_{\mathrm{{nl}}} }[/math]) to zero. These terms can be readily included in any model if required. Masson and LeBlond 1989 discretized the angle [math]\displaystyle{ \theta }[/math] into [math]\displaystyle{ n }[/math] evenly spaced angles [math]\displaystyle{ \theta_{i} }[/math] between [math]\displaystyle{ -\pi }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \pi }[/math]. [math]\displaystyle{ [\mathbf{T}]_{f_{n}} }[/math] is then given by
[math]\displaystyle{ (T_{ij})_{f_{n}}=A^{2}\{\hat{\beta}|D(\theta_{ij})|^{2}\Delta \theta+\delta(\theta_{ij})(1+|\alpha_{c}D(0)|^{2} )+\delta(\pi-\theta_{ij})|\alpha_{c}D(\pi)|^{2} \}, }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \theta_{ij}=|(\theta_{i}-\theta_{j})| }[/math] ( Masson and LeBlond 1989, equation (42)). [math]\displaystyle{ \hat{\beta} }[/math] is a function of [math]\displaystyle{ \Delta t }[/math] given by
[math]\displaystyle{ \hat{\beta}=\int_{0}^{c_{g}\Delta t}\rho_{e}(r)dr, }[/math]
(Masson and LeBlond 1989 p. 68). The function [math]\displaystyle{ \rho_{e}(r) }[/math] gives the effective number of floes per unit area effectively radiating waves under the single scattering approximation which is to assume that the amplitude of a wave scattered more than once is negligible. It is given by
[math]\displaystyle{ \rho_{e}(r)=\frac{2}{\sqrt{3}D_{\mathrm{{av}}}^{2}\left( 1-\frac{8a^{2}}{\sqrt {3}D_{\mathrm{{av}}}^{2}}\right) ^{1/2}}\left( 1-\frac{8a^{2}}{\sqrt {3}D_{\mathrm{{av}}}^{2}}\right) ^{r/2a}, }[/math]
(Masson and LeBlond 1989 equation (29), although there is a typographical error in their equation which we have corrected) where [math]\displaystyle{ D_{av} }[/math] is the average floe spacing and [math]\displaystyle{ a }[/math] is the floe radius (remembering that Masson and LeBlond 1989 considered circular floes). The energy factor [math]\displaystyle{ A }[/math] is given by,
[math]\displaystyle{ A=(1+|\alpha_{c}D(0)|^{2}+|\alpha_{c}D(\pi)|^{2}+\hat{\beta}\int_{0}^{2\pi }|D(\theta)|^{2}d\theta+f_{d})^{-\frac{1}{2}}, }[/math]
(Masson and LeBlond 1989 equation (52)) where the term [math]\displaystyle{ f_{d} }[/math] represents dissipation and is given by
[math]\displaystyle{ f_{d}=e^{\frac{f_{i}}{A_{f}}\sigma_{a}c_{g}\Delta t}-1, }[/math]
(Masson and LeBlond 1989 equation (53)) and [math]\displaystyle{ \alpha_{c} }[/math], the coherent scattering coefficient, is given by
[math]\displaystyle{ \alpha_{c}=\left( \frac{2\pi}{k}\right) ^{1/2}\exp\left( \frac {\mathrm{{i}\pi}}{4}\right) \frac{2}{\sqrt{3}D_{\mathrm{{av}}}^{2}\left( 1-\frac{8a^{2}}{\sqrt{3}D_{\mathrm{{av}}}^{2}}\right) ^{1/2}}\int_{0}^{c_g\Delta t }\exp(\mathrm{{i}}kx_{s})\left( 1-\frac{8a^{2}}{\sqrt{3}D_{{av}}^{2}}\right) ^{x_{s}/2a}dx_{s}. }[/math]
It should be noted that the upper limit of integration for [math]\displaystyle{ \alpha_{c} }[/math] was given as infinity in Masson and LeBlond 1989. This is appropriate in the steady case only; it should have been changed to [math]\displaystyle{ c_{g}\Delta t }[/math] in the time dependent case. However, this correction leads to only negligible quantitative changes to the results.
We will transform the scattering operator [math]\displaystyle{ \mathbf{T} }[/math] by taking the limit as the number of angles used to discretise [math]\displaystyle{ \theta }[/math] tends to infinity. On taking this limit, the operator [math]\displaystyle{ \mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right) }[/math] becomes
[math]\displaystyle{ \mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right) I\left( \theta\right) =A^{2}\{\hat{\beta }\int_{0}^{2\pi}|D(\theta-\theta^{\prime})|^{2}I\left( \theta^{\prime }\right) d\theta^{\prime}+ I\left( \theta\right) \}. }[/math]
The scattering theory of Masson and LeBlond 1989 depends on the values of the time step [math]\displaystyle{ \Delta t }[/math] and the correct solution is found for small time steps. We will now find the equation in the limit of small time steps by taking the limit as [math]\displaystyle{ \Delta t }[/math] tends to zero. As we shall see, when this limit is taken, there is a considerable simplification in the form of the equation. Since
[math]\displaystyle{ I(t+\Delta t)=\mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right) I\mathbf{(}t), }[/math]
we obtain the following expression for the time derivative of [math]\displaystyle{ I }[/math],
[math]\displaystyle{ \frac{\partial I}{\partial t}=\lim_{\Delta t\rightarrow0}\left( \frac{\mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right)I(t) - I(t)}{\Delta t}\right). }[/math]
We can calculate this limit as follows,
[math]\displaystyle{ \lim_{\Delta t\rightarrow0}\left( \frac{\mathbf{T}\left( \Delta t\right)I(t) -I(t)}{\Delta t}\right) =\lim_{\Delta t\rightarrow0}\left( \frac {A^{2}\{\hat{\beta}\int_{0}^{2\pi}|D(\theta-\theta^{\prime})|^{2}I\left( \theta^{\prime}\right) d\theta^{\prime}+I\left( \theta\right) \}-I\left( \theta\right) }{\Delta t}\right) }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ =c_{g}\rho_{e}\left( 0\right) \int _{0}^{2\pi}|D(\theta-\theta^{\prime})|^{2}I\left( \theta^{\prime}\right) d\theta^{\prime}-c_{g}\rho_{e}\left( 0\right) \int_{0}^{2\pi} |D(\theta-\theta^{\prime})|^{2}d\theta^{\prime}+\frac{f_{i}}{A_{f}}\sigma_{a}c_{g}I\left( \theta\right). }[/math]
We can simplify this equation. The value of [math]\displaystyle{ \rho_{e}\left( 0\right) }[/math] is given by
[math]\displaystyle{ \rho_{e}\left( 0\right) =\frac{2}{\sqrt{3}D_{\mathrm{{av}}}^{2}\left( 1-\frac{8a^{2}}{\sqrt{3}D_{\mathrm{{av}}}^{2}}\right) ^{1/2}} =\frac{f_{i}}{A_{f}\sqrt{1-4f_{i}/\pi}}, }[/math]
where we have used the fact that [math]\displaystyle{ f_{i}=2\pi a^{2}/\sqrt{3}D_{av}^{2} }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ A_{f}=\pi a^{2} }[/math].
Equivalence with Linear Boltzmann Model
We show here that the equation above is very similar to the equation derived in Linear Boltzmann Model for Wave Scattering in the MIZ. If we substitute our expressions for [math]\displaystyle{ \rho_e(0) }[/math] iand include the spatial term (which was not in Masson and LeBlond 1989 since they assumed isotropy) and divide by [math]\displaystyle{ c_g }[/math], we obtain the following linear Boltzmann equation
[math]\displaystyle{ \frac{1}{c_g}\frac{\partial I}{\partial t}+\hat{\theta}.\nabla I =\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-4f_{i}/\pi}} \int_{0}^{2\pi}\frac{f_{i}}{A_{f}}|D(\theta-\theta^{\prime })|^{2}I\left( \theta^{\prime}\right) d\theta^{\prime} }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ - \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-4f_{i}/\pi}} \int_{0}^{2\pi}\frac{f_{i}}{A_{f}}|D(\theta-\theta^{\prime})|^{2}d\theta^{\prime}+\sigma_{a} \frac{f_i}{A_{f}} \right)I\left( \theta\right). }[/math]
If we compare this equations with the equivalent equation in Linear Boltzmann Model for Wave Scattering in the MIZ we see that they are identical except for the factor [math]\displaystyle{ 1 / \sqrt{1-4f_{i}/\pi} }[/math] in the two components resulting from the scattering. This difference comes from the fact that, in Masson and LeBlond 1989, multiple scattering is neglected by using an effective density, [math]\displaystyle{ \rho_{e} }[/math], in lieu of the number density [math]\displaystyle{ \rho_{o} }[/math]. The effective density is related to the number density as [math]\displaystyle{ \rho_{e}(0) = \rho_{o}/ \sqrt{1-4f_{i}/\pi} }[/math].