the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Stochastic Collection Equation: Invariant Evolution of the Cloud Droplet–Size Distribution
Abstract. The present paper presents a symmetry analysis of the stochastic collection equation (SCE), which describes the evolution of cloud droplets by their coalescence into larger sizes, and eventually to the size of rain droplets. As the main conclusion, the rain formation is not a simple consequence of the growth of the size of the droplets. When the given kernel is invariant under a scale transformation, the size distribution of the cloud droplets simply shift towards the larger sizes with time, asymptotically preserving its shape (i.e., invariance), and no separate peak in distribution identified as rain emerges. Findings with the symmetry analysis are supported further by numerical experiments.
- Preprint
(640 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-3530', Anonymous Referee #1, 25 Aug 2026
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-3530/egusphere-2026-3530-RC1-supplement.pdfCitation: https://doi.org/
10.5194/egusphere-2026-3530-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Jun-Ichi Yano, 31 Aug 2026
We much appreciate very extensive, critically constructive comments by the present reviewer. We are currently working on those comments, and our more proper response will be given along with the revised manuscript. For now, we just point out a different style of approaches to the problems by mathematicians than a manner that we, physicists deal with. This "cultural gap" must carefully be sorted out in the revision process.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3530-AC1
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Jun-Ichi Yano, 31 Aug 2026
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-3530', Anonymous Referee #2, 26 Aug 2026
The paper deals with a very interesting problem, on the stochastic background of rain drops formation. I have no issue with that. However, Reviewer #1 had 10 pages of thorough comments on all aspects of the paper. I have never seen a reviewer comment like that. I agree that Reviewer #1 has legitimate points. So, at this point, I will agree with reviewer #1 , and wait to see the reply of the authors.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3530-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Jun-Ichi Yano, 31 Aug 2026
We much appreciate a very positive evaluation of our manuscript stating that "The paper deals with a very interesting problem, on the stochastic background of rain drops formation." The present reviewer leaves the details with extensive comments by the Reviewer #2 for now, thus we do not have any specific agendas to respond either.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3530-AC2
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Jun-Ichi Yano, 31 Aug 2026
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 32 | 15 | 8 | 55 | 8 | 9 |
- HTML: 32
- PDF: 15
- XML: 8
- Total: 55
- BibTeX: 8
- EndNote: 9
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1