J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech.

119 (2004) 723

Editorial

Reections on the life and work of Frank Matthews Leslie

This article is part of a Special Issue dedicated to the memory of Frank Leslie

Part 1: Frank Matthews Leslie 19352000

1. Early years Frank Matthews Leslie was born on 8 March 1935 in Dundee, Scotland. He was the second son of William and Catherine, whose father, Frank Rollo Matthews, was a blacksmith in the Dundee jute industry. Franks paternal grand father, also named William, was a reedmaker. His elder brother William McLeish Leslie (known as Bill) had arrived 18 months earlier and his sister Norma was born in 1941. Both sons attended Hawkshill Junior School where they did well and subsequently entered Harris Academy, the premier academic high school in Dundee. When Frank was only 11 years old his father died, aged fty, following an operation to cure a duodenal ulcer and his mother was left to bring up the family alone. It was around this time that Frank entered the Academy where he continued to excel, particularly in mathematics. He was also an enthusiastic cricketer. On leaving school Bill sought employment at the British Linen Bank (later the Bank of Scotland) helping to support his mother, Frank and Norma. Given this nancial cushion and his academic talents, Frank was able to think of studying at University, and, having passed the Entrance Scholarship Examination with ying colours, he entered Queens College in Dundee in 1953. He was the rst in his family to do so. At that time Queens College, later to become the University of Dundee, was still part of the University of St. Andrews. His outstanding performances won him the Myles Bursary and the Spence Bursary. During this period Frank began to concentrate on applied mathematics and, in 1957, was awarded a B.Sc. with rst class honours in mathematics.

2. Early academic career Following his graduation, Frank left for the University of Manchester, to begin postgraduate study in continuum mechanics. His work at Manchester was partly supported by a Sir James Caird Scholarship. At this time, as a result of the inuence of Franks supervisor, the still relatively young Professor (later Sir) James Lighthill, the Manchester
0377-0257/$ see front matter 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jnnfm.2004.03.011

Mathematics Department was a very exciting and stimulating place. Frank was set the problem of extending Lighthills work on so-called thermosyphons. However, after one term Lighthill took a rare period of study leave, and he was passed onto Lighthills younger colleague Bruce Morton. His Ph.D., with a thesis entitled Problems of ow in the open thermosyphon and viscoelasticity of liquids, was awarded in 1961. The thesis work gave rise to three papers. Two of these were concerned with the thermosyphon, and one was concerned with viscoelastic uids. Here, for the rst time, we begin to see a hint of Franks main life work. In the 1950s interest was growing in the formulation of constitutive theories for viscoelastic materials. Franks work was concerned with developing aspects of Jim Oldroyds models [1,2] for viscoelastic uids, making him a natural choice as external examiner for Franks Ph.D. (Fig. 1). Two of the three papers were written with the active collaboration of experimental colleagues. His rst paper [3], entitled Laminar ow in the open thermosyphon, with special reference to small Prandtl numbers, appeared in the Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, and was co-authored by B.W. Martin of the Mechanical Engineering Department of Imperial College, London. It contained both theoretical and experimental results. Likewise, his third paper [4], entitled The slow ow of a viscoelastic uid past a sphere, which appeared in the mathematically much more orthodox Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics, contained an appendix by his colleague Roger Tanner of the Manchester Department of Mechanical Engineering. This commitment to collaboration with experimentalists continued throughout Franks academic life. After his period in Manchester, Frank was lucky enough to obtain a fellowship to spend a year at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Once in America, he continued to work on viscoelastic uids, writing a further paper [5] in this area. It was also during this period that his attention was rst drawn to the work on anisotropic uids by Jerry Ericksen at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland. Franks curiosity was sufciently aroused for him to write to Ericksen for reprints. On his return to the UK, Frank was appointed by Albert Green to the staff of the Mathematics Department at the newly created University of Newcastle. The department

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723

of Franks work during this period in the United States are deferred until Part 2. Sufce it to say here that it resulted in a paper [9] deriving the EricksenLeslie theory which revolutionised the understanding of liquid crystals. On his return to the UK, Frank returned to Newcastle, but now started actively seeking promotion. In early 1968 he was called to interview for senior lectureships in Shefeld and Strathclyde. Unfortunately the interviews were set for the same day. However, both Frank and Ellen felt a strong attachment to their native Scotland, and had always set it as a long term goal to return to Scotland to live. The possible choice between Glasgow and Shefeld was no choice. Frank only attended the Strathclyde interview, and the bet paid off.

3. Strathclyde In October 1968 they moved to Glasgow, and Frank began work in the Department of Mathematics at Strathclyde University. He was to spend the rest of his life there. As his career progressed, Frank was promoted, to reader in 1971, and then to a personal chair in 1979, and nally to an established chair in 1982. As the impact of his liquid crystal work increased, he was much in demand as a speaker at conferences and as a visitor in academic institutions abroad. He revisited Baltimore as a Senior Fellow in Mechanics in 1973, and then in 1978 was invited by Steve Cowin, who at that time was at Tulane University in New Orleans, to spend a couple of months as a visiting professor of engineering in New Orleans. In 1985 he visited Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan, and in 1992 a visit to Pisa began a long-standing interaction with Epifanio Virga. Frank also hosted large numbers of academic guests in Glasgow, including from time to time Jerry Ericksen. The photograph included here shows Frank and Ericksen in Glasgow some time in the mid-1970s (Fig. 2). Franks personal life ourished at the same time as his career. His daughter Sheena was born in 1969, followed by a son Calum in 1974. His wife Ellen remembers him as working all the time, which is an indication of his commitment to his mathematics, but not to the exclusion of all else. He was an active, if amateur, golf-player, and also hill-walker. Somewhat to the surprise of more secular colleagues, as a regular churchgoer, he would always carry his bible to academic conferences. In 1971 he was elected an Elder of the Church of Scotland. He was a Justice of the Peace for 15 years in Bearsden and Milngavie, sitting on the bench three times a year. His academic colleagues the world over all knew of his commitment to the cause of Scottish independence. For 14 years he was treasurer of the Bearsden branch of the Scottish National Party, and at election time, come rain or shine, Frank was on the campaign trail in support of SNP candidates. For many years, starting in the mid 1970s, Frank spent around a month each summer working as a consultant for what was initially the Royal Radar Establishment (RRE) and

Fig. 1. F.M. Leslie at his Ph.D. graduation ceremony 1961.

was undergoing a rapid expansion, enabling Albert to attract young researchers and build up one of the strongest centres of research in continuum mechanics in the UK. Franks previous work in viscoelastic theory made him an ideal member of this group. It was Alberts suggestion that he should concentrate on the anisotropic uid theory developed by Ericksen. There followed two papers on aspects of the ow of these uids. The rst of these treated Hamel (converging) ow [6] and the second Couette ow [7]. We should note that at this stage the identication of Ericksens anisotropic uids and liquid crystals was far from being denitive. This development will be discussed in more detail in Part 2 of this paper. In 1965, Frank turned to the more fundamental problem of the foundations of the theory of anisotropic uids, resulting in a classic paper [8] on the road to the continuum theory of liquid crystals. At this time Franks life was going through important phases, both personally and professionally. After his year at MIT, in the summer of 1962, he returned to Dundee for a holiday to see his family. At a Church of Scotland youth fellowship walking group he met Ellen Reoch. The relationship ourished, and in 1965 they were married. On the professional side, prompted by a colleague and encouraged by Ellen, he successfully applied to spend a sabbatical year in Jerry Ericksens group in Baltimore where he served as a visiting assistant professor. In August 1966 he and Ellen set sail from Southampton for the United States. The details

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723

Fig. 2. Frank and Ericksen in Glasgow some time in the mid-1970s.

later became the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) in Malvern. The family would join him for part of this period and walk in the Malvern Hills. Frank enjoyed these visits as they brought him into contact with practical device-related problems. Malvern was the centre of the British liquid crystal device effort. To quote George Gray in his Obituary to Frank: It is not always realised that Frank Leslies work on the viscosity coefcients of nematics and the provision of the LeslieEricksen Elastic Theory of Liquid Crystals in the late 1960s was of vital importance to the smooth development of the liquid crystal display industry. Because of the understanding of nematics that Frank Leslie provided, display device manufacture could be based on a condent and real understanding of the nematic materials being used. Indeed, it was the success of Franks interaction with the experimentalists involved in the development of devices that led to the acceptance of the EricksenLeslie theory for these materials, without doubt one of the most successful theories of generalised continua. It was this aspect of his work that also gave him most pleasure as he expresses in this extract from an article written for Open University students: For myself as a mathematician I have enjoyed the thrill of seeing my theory and calculations put to practical use, and also the many interdisciplinary interactions that this has brought. However, one could simply say that this is what applied mathematics is all about. Frank was a very able Applied Mathematician who had the rare honour of having his name immortalised in the Leslie coefcients or viscosities and the EricksenLeslie theory. Towards the mid to late 1980s, interest at Malvern began to move towards devices based on the ferroelectric smectic phase. Frank took up this new area with great enthusiasm and it formed the basis of much of his research in the 1990s.

4. Final years In later life, Frank played an extremely active role in the applied mathematics, rheology, and liquid crystal communities. For 20 years he was a mathematics tutor at the Open University. This attested to his commitment to mathematical education as well as to universal access to that education. His contribution was much appreciated by O.U. colleagues, and his students. Frank was a member of the editorial board of several journals, including Liquid Crystals and Continuum Mechanics and Thermodynamics and this journal. He was fellow both of the Institute of Mathematics and its Applications and of the Institute of Physics, thus marking with pride two of the disciplines making up the complex which came to be known as Liquid Crystal Science. He was also elected chair of the British Liquid Crystal Society 19871991, and was extremely active in that post. The Royal Society of Edinburgh elected him as a fellow in 1980, and notwithstanding his proud Scottish heritage, he was extremely proud of his membership of what he always referred to as the Royal Society of London. The tremendous success of the EricksenLeslie theory also brought him honours. In 1980, Johns Hopkins University elected him as a member of their Society of Scholars, in 1982 he was awarded the annual award of the British Society of Rheology, and in 1996 St. Andrews University honoured one of its most successful native sons by awarding him the Sykes Gold Medal following their award of a D.Sc. degree in 1995. In 1997 the British Liquid Crystal Society presented him with its premier award, the G.W. Gray medal. With characteristic modesty initially he was reluctant to accept as he felt that such prizes were better directed to younger scientists. His intensely humorous acceptance speech at the annual British Liquid Crystal Society meeting will long be remembered.

10

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723

After his election to the Royal Society in 1995, Frank travelled widely, often accompanied by Ellen, and was a well-known gure in the liquid crystal community. He built up a mathematical liquid crystal group at Strathclyde, which has gone from strength to strength even after his death. He was due to retire at the end of the 19992000 academic year. To mark his retirement, the British Liquid Crystal Society held its annual meeting at Strathclyde University in March 2000. As preparation for his retirement he and Ellen sold their family home in Bearsden and bought a bungalow in Argyll with ne views over the Clyde estuary. His daughter Sheena was married in September 1998 (a granddaughter Emma was born in April 2000). Just before the wedding Frank noticed a slight stiffness in his hip, and joked that he might have difculty walking her down the aisle. The problem worsened over the following couple of years, and he began to take painkillers. By the time of the March 2000 British Liquid Crystal Society meeting, Frank could be seen to be in considerable discomfort. The hospital consultant prescribed a hip-replacement operation. Unfortunately there was a 9-month waiting list at the local NHS hospital, and to shorten the period of discomfort and provide some sense of certainty, Frank decided to have the operation at a local private hospital. He entered hospital on Wednesday 7 June for what was supposed to be a routine operation. The operation was carried out the following day, and was initially thought to be successful. However, after a few days, Frank began to exhibit symptoms of breathlessness. On Thursday 15 June, the hospital, fearing (as it turned out, correctly) a pulmonary embolism prepared to transfer him to a different hospital but Frank collapsed and died very shortly afterwards. Over the years Frank was a friend to many and was always generous with his help and advice. He had a unique combination of two rare human qualities, he was a gentleman and a scholar. His premature death deprived his family of a loved and loving father and grandfather. He is also greatly missed by his friends and colleagues in the liquid crystal and applied mathematics communities both in the UK and further aeld. Part 2: Liquid crystals To place the work of Frank Leslie into its proper context we examine more closely the historical development of the study of liquid crystals and their continuum description.

lower temperature melted phase was cloudy, but at a higher temperature the cloudiness disappeared suddenly, at what became known as the clearing point. The cloudy phase also exhibited some peculiar colours. Intrigued by this, Reinitzer sent his samples to the German crystallographer Otto Lehmann (18551922), who examined them exhaustively under a polarising microscope. He soon formed the view that the purity of the material was not in question. His observations indicated to him that this was a material which was, at one and the same time, both crystalline and uid (in the sense that it owed). In a series of papers [11] over the next 10 years he distinguished owing crystals (iessende Kristalle or tropfbar ssige Kristalle)they formed dropsand also slimy liquid crystals (schleimig ssige Kristalle). He realised that the materials were optically anisotropic, a property which had previously only existed in the solid state. The origin of the phenomenon was hard to fathom, and eventually Lehmann ascribes it to molekulare Richtkraft (molecular directional force), which from the modern standpoint lacks a little explicatory power. In 1890, the celebrated organic chemist Ludwig Gattermann (18601920) was successful in synthesising for the rst time a double-melting material [12]. This was para-azoxyanisole (PAA), which turned out to be the material of choice of many experimentalists over many years. Following his systematic studies of liquid crystals by looking at homologous series [13] Daniel Vorlnder (18691941) soon realised that an essential pre-requisite for the double-melting property was a rod-shaped molecule [14] (Figs. 3 and 4). There are two approaches to the theoretical study of liquid crystals (i) molecular and (ii) macroscopic. Here we concentrate on the latter but rst, it is worth noting some key players involved in the search for an appropriate molecular

5. Early history The term liquid crystal is a misnomer. The materials known as liquid crystals form phases with properties intermediate between those of a crystal and a uid. The rst observation was by the Austrian botanist Friedrich Reinitzer (18571927), who, in 1888 reported a double melting phenomenon in cholesteryl benzoate [10]. The

Fig. 3. Friedrich Richard Kornelius Reinitzer (18571927).

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723

11

We quote the very rst paragraph from Friedels paper to give an idea of its avour. I use this term (i.e. mesomorphic) to designate those states of matter observed by Lehmann in the years following 1889, and for which he invented the terms liquid crystal and crystalline uid. Lehmann had the great merit of drawing attention to these materials, but he erred greatly in naming them wrongly. The terminology is inapt, despite having been ceaselessly repeated over the last thirty years. His terminology might lead many people to suppose that these substances are just crystals, albeit differing in degree of uidity from those hitherto known. In fact, it is entirely otherwise, and indeed something innitely more interesting than would be the case if we were considering simple crystals exhibiting some unexpected degree of uidity. The following year, Friedels son Edmond collaborated with Maurice de Broglie to test the hypothesis of smectic layering [20], which it passed with ying colours.
Fig. 4. Otto Lehmann (18551922).

theory. These include Emil Bose (18741911) [15] to whom we owe the swarm theory which was dominant until the 1950s. Bose realised that the crucial point of these uids was that they were anisotropic rather than crystalline. His early death prevented him developing a correct molecular eld theory. As it was, the wait turned out to be rather longer. In 1916 Max Born (18821970) transposed the Weiss theory of magnetism into liquid crystal language, supposing that the driving force was electric dipoles on the molecules [16]. Unaware of this work, which was correct mathematically but based on incorrect physics, Francois Grandjean (18821975) published his paper entitled On the application of the theory of magnetism to anisotropic uids [17] which was unread by the German school. It appears to be the forerunner to the later MaierSaupe molecular eld theory [18] which nally reached canonical status when it was published in 1958. Research in liquid crystals must be divided into pre-1922 and post-1922. For in 1922, Georges Friedel (18651933) proposed molecular pictures for the liquid crystalline phases [19]. In the process he excoriated the term liquid crystal itself, but notwithstanding the inaptness of the term, which he tried to replace by mesomorphic (intermediate-form) it was too entrenched, and has survived to the present day. Friedels daughter Marie was a classicist, and it is to her inuence that we owe the terms nematic (thread-like), smectic (soap-like) and cholesteric for the principal liquid crystalline types. Friedels basic thesis was that the important physics lay not in the degree of uidity, but rather in the degree of structure. Thus it was that we learned that the owing crystals were really orientationally ordered, the slimy liquid crystals were arranged in layers, and that Reinitzers cholesteryl benzoate was, despite a supercial optical resemblance to the slimy variety of liquid crystal, a chiral nematic.

6. Towards the continuum theory By this time there were other theorists in the eld. The pioneers were the Swede Carl Wilhelm Oseen (18791944), and the German Hans Zocher (18931969) (Figs. 5 and 6). In the 1920s Oseen had already published a whole series of papers on the liquid crystal problem. The third article in the series [21], published in 1923 and submitted in December 1922, entitled: Essay on a kinetic theory of crystalline uids, article 3, really presents the beginnings of the present-day continuum theory. After a respectful nod toward the founding fathers of hydrodynamics, Oseen continues: The rst question which strikes a theoretician in this eld is the origin of the two forms in which anisotropic liquid drops appear: the sphere-forming liquid crystals, and the owing crystals which also appear crystalline. Lehmann gave the answer to this question, which was that in liquid crystals the structural force is insufcient to overcome the surface tension. That this explanation is valid is hardly open to doubt. The task of the theoretician is to dene this concept of structural force, and connect it to the usual molecular forces . . . . Following 40 pages of complicated algebra there emerges the statement The number of independent constants is therefore four . . . . These are the four elastic constants, which are now traditionally labelled K11 , K22, K33 and K24 or K1, K2, K3 and K4 . By 1933, when Oseen communicated an article [22] (he was not present in person) to the 1933 Faraday Society discussion in London on Liquid Crystals and Anisotropic

12

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723

Fig. 5. Carl Wilhelm Oseen (18791944).

Fig. 6. Hans Zocher (18931969).

Melts, the formulation had reached a more mature state. Fig. 7 shows us that the formulation is not yet quite in modern form; the density has not yet disappeared, the detailed form of the terms is differently stated, and the conventions are different from today. However the theory introduces a vector eld, or director, here denoted by L later to be replaced by n, associated with the orientation of the molecules. Also, the subject of the section bears a modern ring, for Oseen is quite sensibly here concentrating on defect structure. Earlier in the article, Oseen has explained that he will only present new developments because progress up to 1929 can be found elsewhere in his 1929 book The anisotropic uids [23]. Later in the article he presents progress towards a dynamical theory by his student Adolf Anzelius (18941979). That work [24] was not entirely successful, but would nevertheless be the starting point for the successful 1968 EricksenLeslie theory. We now turn from theory to experiment. The dynamical theory of uids, of course, requires a relation between stress and rate of strain. This relation is provided in a Newtonian uid by the viscosity, which also yields a relation for the energy dissipation in terms of the rate of strain. What would be the situation in a liquid crystal? It had long been known that the dielectric response of a liquid crystal depended upon liquid crystal orientation;

this is the essence of what is understood by an anisotropic uid when observed in an optical experiment. As far back as 1913, Neufeld had attempted to nd a magnetic eld dependence of the viscosity, but he reported a negative result [25]. The problem was revived again in 1934 by Marian Mi sowicz (19071992), a student of Professor Mieczyse law Je ewski in the Mining Academy in Cracow, Poland. z Je ewski had been making dielectric studies of liquid crysz tals, and Mi sowicz returned to the viscosity problem, with e apparatus, which although classical in provenance, was

Fig. 7. Extract from Oseens article in the 1933 Faraday Discussion [22].

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723

13

nevertheless considerably more accurate than the apparatus available to Neufeld in 1913. In contrast to Neufeld, Mi sowicz obtained positive ree sults [26]. He reported proof of principle in a paper in Nature in 1935 with a fuller set of results being presented in a paper in German in the Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences in 1936. However this journal is not widely read and so a paper for Nature was in preparation when the war intervened. It is said that at the outbreak of war, Mi sowiczs apparatus e was summarily wrecked by the invading German forces. Be that as it may, Mi sowicz never returned to serious study in e the liquid crystal eld (after the war he became a nuclear physicist). Luckily the results were not completely lost and were eventually published in Nature in 1946. The important point about Mi sowiczs results is that by applying a e magnetic eld, he is able to anchor the nematic director in a specic orientation with respect of a ow eld. He is then able to determine the viscosity when the director is parallel to the ow, or alternatively parallel to the velocity gradient, or out-of-plane. This makes three viscosities altogether. Nowadays they are known as the Mi sowicz viscosities. The e highest viscosity (the second of the three) is between four and seven times the lowest (the rst of the three). For further progress we now have to wait until 1958, when another Faraday Discussion meeting was held, this time in Leeds, entitled Congurations and interactions of macromolecules and liquid crystals. Both meetings were organised by J.D. Bernal (19011971). The introductory lecture [27] at this meeting, entitled On the theory of liquid crystals, was given by Professor Charles Frank (19111998) of the University of Bristol, at that time one of the leading theoretical physicists in the land. Franks lecture begins: One of the principal purposes of this paper is to urge the revival of experimental interest in its subject. After the societys successful Discussion on liquid crystals in 1933, too many people drew the conclusion that the major puzzles were eliminated, and too few the equally valid conclusion that quantitative experimental work on liquid crystal offers powerfully direct information about molecular interactions in condensed phases. The rst paper in the 1933 Discussion was one by Oseen, offering a general structural theory of the classical liquid crystals . . . . In the present paper Oseens theory (with slight modication) is refounded on a securer basis. There follows a restatement of Oseens work with some slight differences. Oseen had doubted whether intermolecular forces could give rise to his elastic theory (in particular of the cholesteric phase), and had doubted even whether Newtons laws were appropriate for these peculiar materials. Frank omitted these aky speculations. The important point is that the elastic theory of liquid crystals follows from the minimisation of an appropriate free energy, involving the four elasticities, which is the one adopted in the EricksenLeslie theory (see Appendix A).

7. Ericksens anisotropic uid theory The next stage in the development has its origin in the mechanics department at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and Jerry Ericksens work on anisotropic uids in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Its subsequent development is greatly inuenced by ideas developed in non-linear continuum mechanics over this period. Ericksen realised that for a dynamic theory it was necessary to move away from minimising an energy function and adopt the framework used to describe conventional uids, namely the conservation laws of mass, linear and angular momentum and energy. His natural starting point [28] was to retain the classical forms for these conservation laws. Consequently, from angular momentum the stress components tij are symmetric and, for an incompressible uid with body forces neglected, the conservation of mass and linear momentum take their usual point forms div v = 0, i = tij,j , v (1) where denotes the density, v is the velocity, a superposed dot denotes the material time derivative and a comma partial differentiation with respect to xj . Here the summation convention is adopted over repeated sufces. Eq. (1) are also the appropriate forms for mass and linear momentum in the EricksenLeslie theory but angular momentum and energy have to be re-assessed. Constitutive equations for tij are needed to complete the theory. By this time it was realised that the constitutive relations in continuum theories must be of the same form in all arbitrary moving right-handed coordinate systems, invariance conditions which were not considered by Oseen [22]. It had also been established that the response of uids characterised by the constitutive assumption that the stress components depend either linearly or non-linearly upon the velocity gradients Vij = vi /xj , and hence through invariance upon the rate of strain Aij = (1/2), (Vij + Vji ) is necessarily isotropic. Ericksen assumed that the stress components depend upon Aij as well as a vector n (or director) introduced in the earlier static theories to describe the anisotropic axis. This vector is assigned to each particle and may vary with position and time. He completed what he believed to be the simplest properly invariant theory of a transversely anisotropic uid by assuming that n depends upon Aij and n. The results for the normal stress differences t11 t22 and t11 t33 in simple shear gave reasonable agreement with the experimental data for polyisobutylene solutions. Either through uncertainty of the basic framework of this early theory, or curiosity, Ericksen [29] revisited the problem and looked in more detail at the basic conservation laws. Here the appropriate forms for the total linear momentum, angular momentum and kinetic energy are motivated by considering the uid to be composed of dumbbell molecules. Whilst the integral statements expressing conservation of mass and linear momentum are unaffected by the structure those for angular momentum and energy contain additional terms. Curiously

14

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723

at this stage, whilst extending the kinematics Ericksen still retains the classical force terms in these latter two equations, excluding contributions from couple stresses or body couples. Instead of postulating an equation for n he now adopted an equation proposed by Oseen in his earlier theory, namely, d dt
V

n dV =

g dV,

Ericksen acknowledged that for an adequate description of liquid crystals it was necessary to include the type of long range interaction introduced by Oseen through the inclusion of the components ni /xj , or director gradients, in the constitutive equations. However, he preferred to avoid this complication: at least until the simplest theory presented here is better understood. As an applied mathematician and in the true spirit of mathematical modelling he was interested in investigating the simplest model rst. The understanding of the theory came through a series of papers by Ericksen [32,33] and Verma [3436] in which they investigated the predictions for the basic ows of simple shear between parallel at plates, Couette, Poiseuille and helical ow through circular cylinders and the Weissenberg cone and plate viscometer. The effect on ow of an applied magnetic eld was also discussed [37]. From Eq. (4), when Aij = 0 and Ni = 0 the hydrostatic stress is pij + 1 ni nj so that there is consistency with classical hydrostatics only if 1 = 0, a point noted by Green [38] in his paper on anisotropic uids. The need for this parameter to vanish was also noted by Ericksen when discussing polyisobutylene solutions and in his 1966 paper Frank [8] shows this to be the case. Its presence caused Ericksen and Verma problems when analysing their ows. In particular, in analysing Poiseuille ow it led to Ericksen introducing a central core moving as a rigid body and yield stress phenomena.

(2)

where V is a material volume and the director body force g is the sum of an extrinsic part, G, in later notation (non-zero if magnetic elds are applied) and an intrinsic part g. Subsequent point forms are derived and in particular ni = gi ,
1 t[ ji] = n[i gj ] = 2 (ni gj nj gi ).

(3)

The rst of these results became affectionately known as the n-equation. The second shows that the antisymmetric part of the stress tensor, t[ji] , is, in general, non-zero. However, under the assumption that the molecular inertia ni van ishes, which in practice is often the case, since then gi = 0 the stress becomes symmetric. Non-symmetric stress tensors had arisen in other continuum theories. For example, Toupins [30] theory of elastic dielectrics and more complicated conservation laws discussed by Grad [31] both had an equation similar to (3)2 . In fact, it was Grads work that Ericksen was to use in a later paper in the move from anisotropic uid theory to a theory appropriate to liquid crystals. As well as looking at appropriate conservation laws, Ericksen also considered a simple constitutive theory in which gi and tij (as well as a heat ux vector) are assumed to depend upon ni , ni , and Vij (as well as density, temper ature and temperature gradient) which through invariance are replaced by ni , Ni and Aij where
1 Ni = ni 2 (Vij Vji )nj

8. Dynamic continuum theory for nematic liquid crystals Having explored the predictions of the anisotropic uid theory, Ericksen [39] began to consider the continuum description of liquid crystals. Recognising that Continuum theories of their mechanical behaviour are still in a rather unsettled state. The rmest part seems to be a partial theory, the hydrostatic theory summarised by Frank. In this work he began with rather general forms of conservation laws discussed earlier by Grad [31]. In effect conservation laws for mass and linear momentum take their conventional forms, allowing for non-symmetry of the stress tensor, whereas those for angular momentum and energy are generalised. In this model the liquid consists of tiny, cylindrically symmetric packets of rodlike molecules. Within each packet, the molecules are parallel to each other. A moving packet is idealised as a line segment of variable direction and length. Ericksen provides an alternative motivation for the forms for total linear momentum, kinetic energy and moment of momentum, which he had derived earlier using a dumbbell molecular model. However, in this

represents the rate of change of n seen in a frame which translates and rotates with the uid element. For the special case of an incompressible uid with unit vector n, where n and n are indistinguishable, under isothermal conditions and assuming linear dependence on Ni and Aij , the constitutive equations are tij = pij + (1 + 1 Akm nk nm )ni nj + 4 Aij + 5 Aik nk nj + 6 Ajk nk ni + 3 ni Nj + 2 nj Ni , gi = (3 + 4 Akm nk nm )ni 2 Aij nj 1 Ni , (4) (5)

where the s and s are constants and 1 = 3 2 , 2 = 6 5 . These forms of the coefcients in the last two terms of gi arise from satisfying (3)2 . We now see part of the EricksenLeslie theory appearing. The constants 1 to 6 are the constants which eventually became known as the Leslie viscosities or coefcients. Apart from the term 1 ni nj , which will be discussed later, Eq. (4) gives the D dissipative part of the stress tij . The last two terms in (5) currently appear in the nal form for gi .

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723

15

discussion, he adopts the generalisation d dt

V

ni dV =

wij dSj +

gi dV

(6)

introducing a surface contribution into this equation. Subsequently in a discussion of the hydrostatics wij is identied with the torque stress referred to by F.C. Frank. In later work it is referred to as director stress. This is related to, but different from, what Truesdell and Toupin ([40], section 200) call the couple stress. Also Ericksen discusses the derivation of the equilibrium equations from a variational principle, an approach which is developed in more detail in his later paper [41]. For the rst time conservation laws are given which are consistent with and are extrapolated from the existing hydrostatic theory. Generalised stresses and body forces are now included in the theory. They are similar to, but improvements on, the laws discussed by Anzelius. In view of later developments it is interesting to note the nal paragraph. By introducing suitable assumptions as to how internal energy, stress etc. are affected by superimposing rigid motions, one can deduce from our version of the law of conservation of energy all other conservation laws here discussed. It would make this paper unduly long to discuss this fact in detail.

Both ideas extend naturally to more general materials and Franks next problem did just that. He used these techniques to reconsider the formulation of the theory for anisotropic uids. With a director assigned at each point of the continuum he applied invariance under superposed rigid body motions to the energy equation proposed earlier by Ericksen [41]. Contributions to the rate of working from generalised stresses and body forces were included. The result was to rederive, under appropriate restrictions, Ericksens earlier theory. One important difference, which followed from the thermodynamics, was the elimination of the term 1 ni nj in the stress which now reduced to a hydrostatic pressure, thus simplifying the predictions for viscometric ows. In Poiseuille ow there is now no need to introduce a central core, the ow prole being parabolic. For all the viscometric ows the apparent viscosity depends upon the director orientation which is at a constant angle across the gap so that only very specic boundary orientations are possible. Also in these ows the stress tensor is symmetric with unequal normal components indicating the possibility of normal-stress effects. A symmetric stress also results when g is parallel to n, extending Ericksens earlier results for g = 0. For a director of constant magnitude Frank points out that the form of the energy equation and the entropy inequality suggests that gi is indeterminate to the extent of an arbitrary scalar multiple of the director and (5) is replaced by gi = ni + 1 Ni + 2 Aij nj , (7) where the function may be interpreted as an arbitrary tension in the director. In the notation of the 1966 paper i =gi . Also with the constitutive theory used in this paper the generalised stress vanishes and the point form of (6) reduces to (3)1 . The dissipative part of the EricksenLeslie theory was now in place but there remained the question of how the static theory proposed by Oseen, rederived by Frank and given a general mechanical framework by Ericksen, could be wedded to the dynamic theory for anisotropic uids. Another unanswered question was how did the anisotropic uid theory t into a complete theory for liquid crystals and were there any circumstances in which its predictions were relevant to the ows of these materials? For the remaining piece of the jigsaw it is back to the United States for Frank Leslies sabbatical year at Johns Hopkins in 19661967. He rst spent some time discussing with Ericksen about the form the full theory for liquid crystals should take. Ericksen then lent him a copy of Anzeliuss doctoral thesis on the dynamical theory of nematics. Another visitor in the mechanics department was Ingo Mller whose interests included the appropriate entropy-production inequality for continuous materials. In the earlier work of Coleman and Noll it is assumed that the entropy ux vector is equal to the heat ux vector divided by the absolute temperature. However Ingos physics background suggested that this assumption may be too restrictive and that the entropy

9. EricksenLeslie theory for nematic liquid crystals We now return to England and to the mathematics department at the University of Newcastle where both Albert Green and Frank Leslie were working on anisotropic uids. Frank worked on applications of Ericksens theory of anisotropic uids and Green was using an approach suggested by Noll. As mentioned earlier, Frank considered Hamel and Couette ows assuming that 1 = 0. During this period Albert Green, Ronald Rivlin and Paul Naghdi were developing their theory for multipolar materials [42] in which balance laws are derived from an appropriate energy equation assuming invariance under rigid body translations and rotations. In a brief note Green and Rivlin [43] show that the equations of conservation of mass and linear momentum for a classical continuous material follow by applying an arbitrary rigid translation to the energy equation whilst applying invariance under arbitrary rigid rotations to the energy equation produces the symmetry of the stress, which for such materials is a reduced form of the principle of angular momentum. Continuum thermodynamics, a controversial area if ever there was one, was being studied in the United States by Bernard Coleman and Walter Noll. In 1963 their seminal paper [44] appeared in which they proposed a procedure whereby well known thermodynamic restrictions on the forms of the constitutive equations for a Newtonian viscous uid are derived from the form of the second law of thermodynamics known as the ClausiusDuhem inequality.

16

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723

ux requires a constitutive equation. For classical thermoelastic materials he [45] shows that the two assumptions are, in fact, equivalent but for more general materials the question remained unanswered. Frank and Ingo became and remained friends and during this year discussed many aspects of continuum mechanics and so it was natural for Frank to adopt Ingos approach for the thermodynamics. Once again the balance laws are derived by applying invariance under superposed rigid body motions to the energy equation used in his 1966 paper. Where the theory differs from the earlier paper is in the discussion of thermodynamics and in the constitutive theory despite the more general starting point. For nematic materials the entropy ux is found to be equal to the heat ux divided by temperature although this is not the case for cholesteric materials (see [46]). The wedding together of the earlier theories is achieved by including the director gradients, ni /xj , as independent variables in the constitutive theory. We recall that whereas these gradients did not appear in the dynamic theory of anisotropic uids they did occur in the static theory for liquid crystals. The addition of these variables in the full theory leads to an elastic contribution to the stress, which is supplemented by a dissipative part given by the last six terms of (4). As in the earlier work, these contributions are assumed to depend linearly upon Ni , Aij as well as temperature gradients. The stress, the director stress and intrinsic director body force now take the forms tij = pij + 1 Akm nk nm ni nj + 4 Aij + 5 Aik nk nj + 6 Ajk nk ni + 3 ni Nj + 2 nj Ni , wij = j ni + , ni,j 1 Ni 2 Aij nj , ni (8) (9) (10)

his graduate students and postdoctoral workers. Nevertheless, to Ericksens surprise, the theory came to be called the EricksenLeslie theory, and given the background described above, the reader will see that this historical judgment is fully justied. Since this new theory was to some extent motivated by the earlier theory proposed by Anzelius it is of some interest to see how they compare. In his paper with Tomas Carlsson [47] Frank summarises their differences and reects on the consequences. There are essentially two main differences between them. The rst is that Anzelius assumed a symmetric viscous stress, and the second is that he did not include terms involving the material time derivative of the director in his equations. As a consequence of the former there is no intrinsic viscous torque in this theory due to the asymmetric stress, and on account of the latter his viscous stress depends solely upon the alignment and the rate of strain tensor. Realising that ow has an aligning inuence, Anzelius introduces such a viscous torque, but independent of his viscous stress, and not properly invariant on account of its explicit dependence upon vorticity. Also, Oseen [22] remarks that its role with respect of work and energy is not clear. Had Anzelius introduced the time derivative of the director, he then had the means to make his torque properly invariant, but he may not have seen the need to do this. Also, he would then have been able to invoke simple thermodynamic arguments concerning viscous dissipation, but he had little by way of precedents to follow in this respect. Of course, had Anzelius known of the work by Tsvetkov, he may well have included the time derivative of the director, but it is difcult to speculate as to whether or not he would then have reconsidered the other aspects mentioned above. In 1970 Parodi [48] proposed that there are only ve independent Leslie viscosities since 3 + 2 = 6 5 , a relation which Currie [49] deduced from a stability argument. Some years later Frank revisited the theory to address the physical interpretation of the n equation [cf. (6)]. In his 1979 review article [50] Frank discusses this equation and shows how it could be regarded as expressing the balance of angular momentum given some other condition being satised. Finally, in his 1992 paper [51], he shows how the EricksenLeslie theory can be deduced solely from the principles of linear and angular momentum without appeal to generalised forces and moments associated with the director and this extra equation is shown to follow from angular momentum.

gi = ni j ni,j

where and i are an arbitrary scalar and vector, arising from constraining n to be a unit vector, and the free energy = (ni , ni,j ) is taken in the form proposed by F.C. Frank. The director stress wij has no dissipative part. Apart from the terms involving i , the non-dissipative terms are those derived earlier by Ericksen [41]. However, Ericksen seems to have overlooked the possibility of such an additional indeterminacy. The terms involving i contribute nothing new to the equations of motion, but they could be signicant if the director stress is specied at the boundary. By the end of his sabbatical year, Frank had completed the nal form of the theory [9] which was modestly entitled Some constitutive equations for liquid crystals. For the rst time there was a dynamic theory which does reduce to the Frank theory in the hydrostatic limit, and also (as it is designed to be) to the NavierStokes equations in the absence of anisotropy. Frank, acknowledging his strong intellectual debt to Ericksen, did suggest that his name be included as an author. It was Ericksens rather generous practice, however, not to include his name on papers written by

10. Viscometry Having constructed the new theory the next step was to compare it with experimentation. Viscometry had played a

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723

17

prominent role in studies of the physical properties of liquid crystals and it was this area which was to prove signicant in establishing the EricksenLeslie theory. Quite a bit was known about the orienting effects of walls. For example, the long studied liquid crystal PAA (p-azoxyanisole) can be oriented so that n is perpendicular to a glass wall if the glass is treated with suitable acids or detergents, whereas if the glass is repeatedly rubbed in one direction, n will be tangent to the glass, pointing in the rub direction. Because of these surface effects, apparent viscosities will depend on the wall material and its prior treatment. To minimise these effects in his work Mi sowicz had used wide gaps and vare ied the experimental conditions. Others who did not take similar precautions produced data which deed interpretation. Whilst there was a long history of observations which demonstrated that liquid crystals were non-Newtonian, the reasons for these effects were less clear. One view shared by Ericksen and Roger Porter was that the wall dictated one orientation and the ow another and so they were in competition. With the EricksenLeslie theory there was an opportunity for the rst time of affecting the ow by the boundary orientation, unlike in the anisotropic uid theory. The simplest situation in which to investigate this competition is in simple shear with the upper plate moving with constant speed V and the lower plate xed (see Fig. 8). To analyse this problem Frank considered the possibility of a solution for the velocity eld of the form vx = u(y),
1 u( 2 h) = V,

where c is a constant and the viscosity function, which depends upon orientation, is given by g() = b cos2 + c sin2 + 1 sin2 cos2 , where 2b = 4 + 3 + 6 = 2g(0),
1 2c = 4 + 5 2 = 2g( 2 ).

The viscosities b , c are two combinations which arose in the earlier work of Miesowicz. Dening an apparent viscosity, , by = c/(V/ h) for gap width h, it follows that for this solution = f(Vh). The form of the function f varies with material. For a xed material it varies with wall orientation. Two interesting limits
ch2

lim

= g(0 ),

ch2 0

lim

= g(0)

vy = vz = 0;

1 u( 2 h) = 0,

and a symmetric solution for the orientation nx = cos (y), (y) = (y), (y)|y=0 = 0, ny = sin (y), (0) = m nz = 0;

1 1 ( 2 h) = 0 = ( 2 h),

which lies in the plane of shear; strong anchoring being assumed at the walls. A number of interesting results followed. The shear stress txy is given by txy = g()u (y) = c,

are also found. The former, corresponding to a wide gap, gives the constant value at the orientation preferred by the ow. The constant angle 0 , given by tan2 0 = 3 /2 , arises in the corresponding analysis using the anisotropic uid theory. Although this earlier theory is too simplistic for liquid crystals it does indicate the behaviour away from the boundaries at high shear rates. The latter limit gives the constant value at the orientation preferred by the boundary. In this solution Frank derived what came to be called shear alignment, in which the director orients itself at some well-dened angle to the ow direction and found that there was a boundary layer effect and a relaxation length over which shear alignment was adopted. Clearly this is only possible in materials for which 2 and 3 have the same sign. Whilst many liquid crystals do satisfy this condition there are some which do not. Ericksen [52] raised the question of whether the simple scaling = f(Vh) was for this solution or did it hold more generally? He showed that the scaling held under more general conditions. Before attempting any comparison with experimentation he felt that the analysis should be attempted for ows encountered in real viscometers. One of us (Ray Atkin) had recently joined Ericksens research group as a postdoctoral worker. Ericksen urged him to investigate other ow problems. For Poiseuille ow similar reasoning gave the relationship between the efux, Q, the radius, R, and the pressure gradient P as Q = RF(PR3 ). Here the appropriately dened apparent viscosity, , is given by = PR4 Q =G . 8Q R

Fig. 8. The director is strongly anchored in the x-direction on parallel boundary plates which are placed at a distance h apart. The lower plate is xed with velocity set to zero while the upper plate has a relative shear velocity of V. The orientation angle (y) of the director is dened as shown.

[53]. The functions F and G vary with material and for a xed material with boundary orientation. This result is in marked contrast with the corresponding result for an isotropic non-Newtonian (viscoelastic) uid where is a function of Q/R3 .

18

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723

The experimental verication of this result was not long in coming. At the second International Liquid Crystal Conference held at Kent State University in 1968 Fredrickson and his graduate student Fisher gave a paper on ow of nematic PAA through narrow capillaries with radii 38258 m. From their results the apparent viscosity was emphatically not a function of Q/R3 as each capillary and boundary condition yielded a different curve for (Q/R3 ). However, hearing of the new scaling Fisher and Fredrickson rapidly replotted their data. In [54] they found that for perpendicular surface alignment when is plotted as a function of Q/R, the curves from different capillaries collapsed onto one plot. For parallel surface alignment the results were not in such good agreement but the authors acknowledge that the rubbing technique used may not have been satisfactory. This conrmation of the novel scaling gave the rst experimental verication of the theory and subsequently it was seen to support a number of the assumptions made in formulating the constitutive theory (see [50]). It also justies the strong anchoring on the surface.

11. Developing the liquid crystal theory The following few years were very productive for Frank. In 1968 [46] he extended his dynamical theory of nematic liquid crystals to the chiral cholesterics, thereby incorporating not only the extra chiral terms in the nematic free energy proposed by F.C. Frank, but also introducing extra chiral terms in the dissipative stress tensor. A joint paper by Atkin and Leslie [55] in 1970 extended the viscometric analysis to Couette ow. He also turned his attention to nding two-dimensional exact static solutions under electric and magnetic elds [56]. In what turned out to be a particularly important paper for the development of liquid crystal devices, also in 1970 [57], he analysed the distorting effect of a magnetic eld on twisted orientation patterns. This was the written version of the talk given by Frank at the third International Liquid Crystal Conference in Berlin in July 1970. The physical problem was what we now call a hybrid liquid crystal cell, in which the directors at the (parallel) cell boundaries are oriented in the planes of the boundary, but perpendicular to each other. Inside the cell the director twists around uniformly from one orientation to the other. A magnetic eld across the cell, however, interacts with the director, and in Franks hypothetical case, favoured director orientation along the magnetic eld. The director will thus swing out of the plane of the boundary, but for reasons of symmetry will only do so at a threshold eld. Mathematically this requires a three-dimensional solution for the director. The general effect had been observed by Fredericksz and Zolina in 1927 [58]giving rise to the eponymous Fredericksz effectand explained by Zocher [59] in 1933, but only in the case of a normal cell in which in the eld-free case the director was uniform. Untwisting of twisted liquid

crystal textures was observed and understood in principle, though not in any theoretical detail, by Charles Mauguin (18781958) in 1911. He showed, using an argument due to Poincar, that a twisted structure could, in a suitable limit now known as the Mauguin rgime, act as a wave guide, twisting the light polarisation axis with it [60]. Frank found a specic formula which generalised Zochers result. The importance of the result, however, is not its mathematical sophistication (although it was by no means trivial). Rather it was the inuence on the thinking of Martin Schadt and Wolfgang Helfrich, who, at the time of Franks talk, were in the process of patenting the twisted nematic liquid crystal device. This has turned out to be the major (at screen) liquid crystal display technology. Schadt and Helfrich [61] realised that the mathematics would remain more or less unchanged if an electric eld were to be substituted for a magnetic eld. Franks result thus formed the foundation for the emerging at screen display industry. The tale is told that while performing this calculation Frank was supervising a televised undergraduate lecture. At that time Strathclyde classes were very large and some were given over a television link, with a lecturer sitting in at the back. Inevitably, he was concentrating hard on his work. The time for the end of the lecture came and went. Frank continued with his algebra. The students remained in their places, waiting for a signal to leave, but none came. Finally, a bold student gingerly approached the lecturer . . . could the students leave now, please? A further set of papers [62,63] responded in detail to experiments by Pieranski and Guyon [64,65] designed explicitly to test the EricksenLeslie theory. With the growth of the British LCD effort in Malvern, Frank began an intensive collaboration with the engineers in the Malvern group. A paper with Clark [66] analyses the orientational relaxation when a eld is removed, this being an obvious problem occurring in real devices. The original contribution here concerns so-called backow. This is the ow induced when the director rotates, and occurs because coherent rotation, necessarily involving ow, is less dissipative than local rotation of the director. The consequence of this is that a relaxing director may appear to overshoot its equilibrium conguration before returning to equilibrium. In display device applications, for which the update time was all-important, this was an important lesson; in relaxation calculations it is important not to ignore ow-director rotation. Frank continued to investigate ow problems in nematic liquid crystals until his death. His 1979 review article in Advances in Liquid Crystals was particularly inuential in codifying the current state of his theory [50]. He also addressed a number of other issues. With his Strathclyde colleague Peter Barratt [67], he considered reection and refraction of light at liquid crystal boundaries, thereby treating experiments carried out by Martinoty and Candau [68]. With his Malvern colleague Colin Waters [69], he investigated light scattering from a nematic liquid crystal in the presence of an alternating electric eld, including

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723

19

the complications of both conduction and exoelectricity. With his colleague Steve Cowin (at that time at Tulane) he addressed the problem of the correct denition of kinetic energy and momentum in so-called Cosserat continua [70]. In these systems, dating from 1909 and which served as models for the director systems which were the precursors of the EricksenLeslie theory, bodies carry along internal frames of reference. More recently he had been investigating ow-induced switching in bistable nematic devices [71,72] with his postdoctoral workers Paul Kedney and John McIntosh, in a joint European Network with George Durand.

now enable the elastic constants to be determined [82]. Notwithstanding the apparent complexity of the dynamic theory, some progress has been possible in this eld as well, particularly when dealing with shear ow in the case when the bounding plates and the layers are parallel. With Blake he treated simple ow instabilities [83]; Barratt and Duffy [84], and again Blake and Leslie [85], treated the smectic equivalent of nematic backow. The applications and implications of this theory are not as fully resolved as for the nematic theory, but an encouraging body of results is developing. 13. Biaxial nematic liquid crystals

12. Smectic liquid crystals Franks research underwent a change in direction following the discovery by Clark and Lagerwell [73] of the possibility of fast-switching liquid crystal display devices based on ferroelectricity in the smectic C phase. This is a layered structure in which the director n makes an angle with respect to the layer normal. A major stimulus to the development of a non-linear continuum theory for these materials came with the formation, in 1988, of the SERC-funded Smectic Continuum Theory Consortium. This group of British researchers was coordinated by Mike Clark, then at the G.E.C. Hirst Research Centre in Wembley, and also included David Tilley in Essex and Roy Sambles in Exeter, as well as Frank himself. During this period Franks group expanded; Iain Stewart joined as a postdoctoral worker, along with research students Joe Laverty, Simon Gill, George Blake and Claire Anderson. Tomas Carlsson and Masahiro Nagakawa also visited for extended periods. The choice of basic variables for the theory proved central. Franks initial theory, developed in the summer of 1987 at Malvern, used the director n together with a director a in the direction normal to the local layered structure. However, this theory turned out to be too complex, and eventually n was replaced by a vector c, the projection of the director onto the plane of the layers, a choice earlier adopted by Pierre-Ciilles de Gennes [74]. In the original (simpler) theory the layers were assumed incompressible and the tilt angle constant, but in later versions of the theory both assumptions were relaxed [75,76]. Even the simpler theory [77], however, contains a dissipative stress with as many as 20 viscosities and a quadratic elastic energy function having nine terms for non-chiral smectic C [78] and eleven for chiral materials [79]. A vital test for the static theory of the smectic C phase was whether it contained solutions describing the so-called focal conics. These structures are known to be the key optical signature of the smectic phase, and were used heuristically by Georges Friedel in the 1920s to identify the smectic phase structure. The theory passed this test, predicting Dupin cyclides [80] and parabolic cyclides [81], at least with a slightly simplied elastic energy function. There are also solutions corresponding to Fredericksz transitions, which

In 1980 Yu and Saupe [86] discovered experimentally a biaxial nematic phase in a multicomponent lyotropic system. In biaxial phases all three principal components of the dielectric tensor are different, as compared to the usual uniaxial case, in which there are only different components parallel and perpendicular to the distinguished axis. By contrast with usual thermotropic liquid crystal systems consisting of small molecules, lyotropic phases are solutions of larger molecules in water, and the liquid crystallinity is controlled by the concentration of the rod-like molecules. Subsequently the synthesis of analogous thermotropic materials has also been reported. Frank set to work to construct a continuum theory for these materials too. He felt that it must be possible to construct a natural generalisation of the EricksenLeslie theory by introducing two vectors to describe the biaxiality. This work, which also involved Tomas Carlsson, Joe Laverty and Stephen Moir, progressed in parallel to the work on smectic theory. The nal theory [87] involves a quadratic elastic energy with twelve terms. By supposing that the dissipative stress is derivable from a dissipation function, Frank found that the theory now involves twelve different viscosities. A very similar dissipative stress also arises in the theory for the smectic CM materials. It is interesting to note that from a conceptual point of view Franks continuum smectic C theory is a theory for a biaxial material with non-standard invariance properties; the details of the layering structure are subsumed within the continuum theory. Elasticities must be measured to be useful. Chandrasekhar [88] had suggested that biaxial nematic systems could be aligned using crossed electric and magnetic elds, and that this might be used to measure the elasticities. Franks static theory [89] shows that some caution would be required in interpreting such experiments, as the systems exhibit bistability in some equilibrium congurations. The dynamical theory was also used to make predictions about ow alignments and instability [90,91]. 14. Conclusion In this paper we have given an outline of Franks life and some of his work. We have supplemented this with a sketch

20

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723

of the early development of liquid crystal science, tracing out in more detail the historical development of the continuum description of the nematic phase culminating with the EricksenLeslie theory. The groundwork established in the development of this theory formed a base from which to develop the continuum theories for smectic C and biaxial liquid crystals in the 1990s. Although we have given sketches rather than full histories, we hope that they have given a avour of the excitement of the scientic process in the eld of liquid crystals, especially, in particular, the process of creating a mathematical theory for nematic liquid crystals which has proved remarkably successful in explaining many of their properties.

div

W n

W + gd + n = 0. n

1 1 W = W(n, n) = 2 K1 ( n)2 + 2 K2 (n n)2 1 + 2 K3 (n n)2 1 + 2 (K2 + K4 ) [(n )n ( n)n],

t D = 1 n Ann n + 2 N n + 3 n N + 4 A +5 An n + 6 n An, gd = 1 N 2 An, 1 = 3 2 , 2 = 6 5 = 3 + 2 , 1 > 0, N= dn 1 2 {v (v)T }n, dt

Acknowledgements This paper is a longer version of a talk given to honour Frank Leslie at the Soft Matter Modelling Meeting in Cortona in September 2001. Some of this material has appeared elsewhere in a biographical memoir [92]. We thank Frank Leslie himself, and Epifanio Virga and Paolo Biscari for inviting us to the meeting, although obviously we would have preferred the subject of the talk to have been otherwise. We also thank the Instituto Nazionale di Alta Matematica Francesco Severi for nancial support at this meeting. We are grateful to Ellen Leslie and Norma McGrory (ne Leslie) for many recollections concerning the Leslie family over the years. Frank himself, in collaboration with Tomas Carlsson (Chalmers University, Gteborg, Sweden), wrote an important article on the development of the continuum theory of liquid crystals. This article illuminates, in characteristically modest fashion, his own contribution, and has provided important source material. We are grateful to Tomas for the opportunity of discussing it with him and for allowing us to borrow some of the technical discussion. Obituaries written by his colleagues David Sloan, Michael Hayes, Robin Knops and Ingo Mller have also helped to round the picture we have of Frank. We also thank Andrew Brown, Mike Clark, Derek Collins, Steve Cowin, David Dunmur, Jerry Ericksen, George Gray, Bruce Morton, Peter Raynes, Norman Riley, Epifanio Virga and Ken Walters. The frontispiece photograph was taken in 1995 by Prudence Cumming Associates and is copyright The Royal Society. The photograph of Frank in 1961 at his graduation ceremony, and that of Frank with Ericksen in the mid-1970s, were kindly provided by Ellen Leslie.

4 > 0

and

2A = v + (v)T , n n = 1.

Here ab denotes the 33 matrix with the (ij)th element D ai bj . The components of div tD and div(W/n) are tij,j and (W/ni,j ), j , respectively. The coefcients K1 to K4 are Frank elastic constants and the coefcients appearing in tD and gd are the Leslie viscosity coefcients. The quantity is a Lagrange multiplier arising from the constraint that n is a unit vector.

Appendix B. Summary of biaxial nematic theory div v = 0, dv = grad p + (n)T gn + (m)T gm + div t D , dt p = p + W, W n W m W + gn + n + m = 0, n W + gm + m + n = 0. m

div div

W(n, mn, m)
1 1 1 = 2 K1 ( n)2 + 2 K2 (n n)2 + 2 K3 (n n)2 1 1 + 2 K4 ( m)2 + 2 K5 (m m)2 1 1 + 2 K6 (m m)2 + 2 K7 [n (m m)]2 1 1 + 2 K8 [m (n n)]2 + 2 K9 [m (n m)]2 1 1 + 2 K10 [n (m n)]2 + 2 K11 [ (n m)]2 1 + 2 K12 [ (n m)]2 ,

Appendix A. Summary of the EricksenLeslie theory div v = 0, dv = grad p + (n)T gd + div t D , dt p = p + W,

(see [93]),

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723

21

t D = 1 nA(n n) + 2 N n + 3 n N + 4 A + 5 An n + 6 n An + 1 mAm(m m) + 2 M m + 3 m M + 5 Am m + 6 m Am + N m(1 m n + 2 n m) + nAm(3 m n + 4 n m) + 5 mAm(n n), gn = (1 N + 2 An + 3 N mm + 4 (mAn)m), 1 = 3 2 , 4 = 4 3 , gm = (1 M + 2 Am) 1 = 3 2 , 2A = v + (v)T , dm 1 M= 2 {v (v)T }m, dt dn 1 N= 2 {v (v)T }n, dt n n = m m = 1, n m = 0. 2 = 6 5 , 2 = 6 5 , 3 = 2 1 ,

D ts = 0 A + 1 a Da (a a) + 2 (Da a + a Da )

+ 3 c Dc (c c) + 4 (Dc c + c Dc )

+ 5 c Da (a c + c a) + 1 (A a + a A) + 2 (C c + c C) + 3 c A(a c + c a) + 1 (Da c + c Da + Dc a + a Dc ) + 2 [a Da (a c + c a) + 2a Dc a a] + 3 [c Dc (a c + c a) + 2a Dc c c] + 1 (C a + a C) + 2 (A c + c A) + 23 c A a a + 24 c A c c,
D tss = 1 (a Da Da a) + 2 (c Dc Dc c)

+3 c Da (a c c a) + 4 (a A A a) +5 (c C C c) + 6 c A(a c c a) +1 (c Da Da c) + 2 (a Dc Dc a) +3 a Da (a c c a) + 4 c Dc (a c c a) +5 (c A A c + a C C a), ga = 2(1 Da + 3 c Da c + 4 A + 6 c Ac + 2 Dc +3 a Da c + 4 c Dc c + 5 C), gc = 2(2 Dc + 5 C + 1 Da + 5 A), 2A = v + (v)T , A= da 1 2 {v (v)T }a, dt dc 1 2 {v (v)T }c, C= dt a c = 0, a = 0.

The vectors n and m are mutually orthogonal unit vectors. The coefcients appearing in tD , gn and gm are viscosity coefcients. K1 to K12 are elastic constants. The quantities , and are Lagrange multipliers arising from the above three constraints on n and m.

Appendix C. Summary of smectic C theory div v = 0, dv = grad p + (a)T ga + (c)T gc + div t D , dt p = p + W, W a W c W + ga + a + c + = 0, a W + gc + c + a = 0. c

a a = c c = 1,

The smectic layer normal is denoted by a and c is the unit orthogonal projection of the director n onto the smectic planes. K1 to K9 are elastic constants. The coefcients appearing in tD , ga and gc are viscosity coefcients. The quantities , , and are Lagrange multipliers arising from the four smectic constraints listed above.

div

References
[1] J.G. Oldroyd, On the formulation of rheological equations of state, Proc. R. Soc. A200 (1950) 532541. [2] J.G. Oldroyd, Non-Newtonian effects in steady motion of some idealized elastico-viscous liquids, Proc. R. Soc. A245 (1958) 278 297. [3] F.M. Leslie, B.W. Martin, Laminar ow in the open thermosyphon, with special reference to small Prandtl numbers, J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 1 (1959) 184193. [4] F.M. Leslie, The slow ow of a viscoelastic liquid past a sphere, Q. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 14 (1961) 3648. [5] F.M. Leslie, The motion of a at plate from rest in a viscoelastic liquid, Proc. Edin. Math. Soc. 13 (1963) 223233.

div

W(a, c, a, c)
1 1 1 = 2 K1 ( a)2 + 2 K2 ( c)2 + 2 K3 (a c)2 1 1 + 2 K4 (c c)2 + 2 K5 (b c)2

+K6 ( a)(b c) + K7 (a c)(c c) +K8 ( c)(b c) + K9 ( a)( c),

D D t D = ts + tss ,

22

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723 [31] H. Grad, Statistical mechanics, thermodynamics and uid dynamics of systems with an arbitrary number of integrals, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 5 (1952) 455494. [32] J.L. Ericksen, Theory of anisotropic uids, Trans. Soc. Rheol. 4 (1960) 2939. [33] J.L. Ericksen, Poiseuille ow of certain anisotropic uids, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 8 (1961) 18. [34] P.D.S. Verma, Couette ow of certain anisotropic uids, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 10 (1962) 101107. [35] P.D.S. Verma, Flow of anisotropic uids between rotating coaxial cones, Arch. Mech. Stosow. 15 (1963) 767773. [36] P.D.S. Verma, Helical ow of anisotropic uids, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 19 (1964) 22142218. [37] J.L. Ericksen, Some magnetohydrodynamic effects in liquid crystals, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 23 (1966) 266275. [38] A.E. Green, A continuum theory of anisotropic uids, Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc. 60 (1964) 123128. [39] J.L. Ericksen, Conservation laws for liquid crystals, Trans. Soc. Rheol. 5 (1961) 2334. [40] C. Truesdell, R.A. Toupin, in: S. Flugge (Ed.), The Classical Field Theories, Handbuch der Physik, vol III/I, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1960, pp. 226790. [41] J.L. Ericksen, Hydrostatic theory of liquid crystals, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 9 (1962) 371378. [42] A.E. Green, R.S. Rivlin, Multipolar continuum mechanics, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 17 (1964) 113147. [43] A.E. Green, R.S. Rivlin, On Cauchys equations of motion, Z. Angew. Math. Phys. 15 (1964) 290292. [44] B.D. Coleman, W. Noll, The thermodynamics of elastic materials with heat conduction and elasticity, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 13 (1963) 167178. [45] I. Mller, On the entropy inequality, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 26 (1967) 118141. [46] F.M. Leslie, Some thermal effects in cholesteric liquid crystals, Proc. R. Soc. A307 (1968) 359372. [47] T. Carlsson, F.M. Leslie, The development of theory for ow and dynamic effects for nematic liquid crystals, Liq. Cryst. 26 (1999) 12671280. [48] O. Parodi, Stress tensor for a nematic liquid crystal, J. Phys. 31 (1970) 581584. [49] P.K. Currie, Parodis relation as a stability condition for nematics, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 28 (1974) 335338. [50] F.M. Leslie, Theory of ow phenomena in liquid crystals, Adv. Liq. Cryst. 4 (1979) 181. A recent introduction to nematic and smectic continuum theory may be found in: I.W. Stewart, The Static and Dynamic Continuum Theory of Liquid Crystals: A Mathematical Introduction, Taylor & Francis, London, 2004.. [51] F.M. Leslie, Continuum theory for nematic liquid crystals, Continuum Mech. Thermodyn. 4 (1992) 167175. [52] J.L. Ericksen, A boundary-layer effect in viscometry of liquid crystals, Trans. Soc. Rheol. 13 (1969) 915. [53] R.J. Atkin, Poiseuille ow of liquid crystals of the nematic type, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 38 (1970) 224240. [54] J. Fisher, A.G. Fredrickson, Interfacial effects on the viscosity of a nematic mesophase, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 8 (1969) 267284. [55] R.J. Atkin, F.M. Leslie, Couette ow of nematic liquid crystals, Q. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 23 (1970) S3S24. [56] F.M. Leslie, Some magneto-static effects in nematic liquid crystals, J. Phys. D 3 (1970) 889897. [57] F.M. Leslie, Distortion of twisted orientation patterns in liquid crystals by magetic elds, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 12 (1970) 5772. [58] V. Fredericksz, V. Zolina, On the use of a magnetic eld in the measurement of the forces tending to orient an anisotropic liquid in a thin homogeneous layer, Transactions of the American Electrochemical Society, 55 (1929) 8596 (reprinted in SDS). The original reference in the Russian literature seems to be: A. Repiewa, V.K.

[6] F.M. Leslie, Hamel ow of certain anisotropic uids, J. Fluid Mech. 18 (1964) 595601. [7] F.M. Leslie, The stability of Couette ow for certain anisotropic uids, Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc. 60 (1964) 949955. [8] F.M. Leslie, Some constitutive equations for anisotropic uids, Q. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 19 (1966) 357370. [9] F.M. Leslie, Some constitutive equations for liquid crystals, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 28 (1968) 265283. [10] F. Reinitzer, Contributions to the understanding of cholesterol, Monatshefte fr Chemie (Wien) 9 (1888) 421441. This and a number of other historical references below are collected (where necessary in translation), in: T.J. Sluckin, D.A. Dunmur, H. Stegemeyer (Eds.), Crystals that Flow: Classic Papers in the History of Liquid Crystals, Taylor & Francis, London, 2004, labelled as SDS. For other general historical reviews, see: H. Kelker, History of liquid crystals, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 21 (1973) 148; H. Kelker, P.M. Knoll, Some pictures of the history of liquid crystals, Liq. Cryst. 5 (1989) 1942. [11] O. Lehmann, On owing crystals, Zeitschrift fr Physikalische Chemie 4 (1889) 462472. [12] L. Gattermann, A. Ritschke, On azoxphenetole ethers, Berichte der Deutschen Chemischen Gesellschaft 23 (1890) 17381750 (translated in SDS). [13] D. Vorlnder, On crystalline uid substances, Berichte der Deutschen Chemischen Gesellschaft 39 (1907) 803810 (translated in SDS). [14] D. Vorlnder, Inuence of the molecular structure on the crystallineliquid state, Berichte der Deutschen Chemischen Gesellschaft 40 (1906) 19701972 (translated in SDS). [15] E. Bose, Theories of anisotropic uids, Phys. Zeit. 8 (1907) 513 517, ibid, 9 (1908) 708713, ibid 10 (1909) 230244. [16] M. Born, On anisotropic uids. Essay on a theory of the liquid crystals and the electric KERR effects in liquids, Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. 30 (1916) 614650. [17] F. Grandjean, On the application of the theory of magnetism to anisotropic uids, Comptes Rendus de lAcadmie des Sciences 164 (1917) 280283 (translated in SDS). [18] W. Maier, A. Saupe, An easy molecular theory of the nematic liquid crystal phase, Zeitschrift Naturforschung 13 (1958) 564566 (translated in SDS). [19] G. Friedel, The mesomorphic states of matter, Ann. Phys. 18 (1922) 273474 (extracts in SDS; there is another translation by the US army). [20] M. de Broglie, E. Friedel, X-ray diffraction by smectic materials, Comptes Rendus de lAcadmie des Sciences 176 (1923) 738740. [21] C.W. Oseen, Essay on a kinetic theory of crystalline uids, Kungl. Svenska Vetenskapakademiens Handligar 63 (12) (1923) 140. [22] C.W. Oseen, The theory of liquid crystals, Trans. Faraday Soc. 29 (1933) 883900 (reprinted in SDS). [23] C.W. Oseen, Die anisotropen Flssigkeiten. Tatschen und Theorien Fortschritte der Chemie, Physik und physikalische Chemie 20 (2) (1929) 25111. [24] A. Anzelius, ber die Bewegung der Anisotropen Flssigkeiten, Uppsala Univ. Arsskr., Mater. Och Natjurvet 1 (1931) 184. [25] M.W. Neufeld, Phys. Z. 14 (1913) 645, cited in M. Mi sowicz, Liquid e Crystals in my memories and nowthe role of anisotropic viscosity in liquid crystals research, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 97 (1983) 111. [26] M. Mi sowicz: (a) Inuence of a magnetic eld on the viscosity of e para-azoxyanisole, Nature 136 (1936) 261; (b) The three coefcients of viscosity of anisotropic uids, Nature 158 (1946) 27. [27] F.C. Frank, On the theory of liquid crystals, Disc. Faraday Soc. 25 (1958) 1928. [28] J.L. Ericksen, Transversely isotropic uids, Kolloid-Zeit. 173 (1960) 117122. [29] J.L. Ericksen, Anisotropic uids, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 4 (1960) 231237. [30] R.A. Toupin, The elastic dielectric, J. Ration. Mech. Anal. 5 (1959) 8290.

Editorial / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 119 (2004) 723 Fredericksz, On the question of the nature of the anisotropic state of matter, Zh.R.F.Kh.O. 59 (1927) 183200. H. Zocher, The effect of a magnetic eld on the nematic state, Trans. Faraday Soc. 29 (1933) 945957 (reprinted in SDS). Ch. Mauguin, On Lehmanns liquid crystals, Bull. Socit Franaise de Minralogie 34 (1911) 71117. M. Schadt, W. Helfrich, Voltage-dependent optical activity of a twisted nematic liquid crystal, Appl. Phys. Lett. 18 (1971) 127128. F.M. Leslie, Analysis of a ow instability in nematic liquid crystals, J. Phys. D 9 (1976) 925937. F.M. Leslie, Magnetohydrodynamic instabilities in nematic liquid crystals, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 37 (1976) 335352. P. Pieranski, E. Guyon, Shear-ow-induced transition in nematics, Solid State Commun. 13 (1973) 435437. P. Pieranski, E. Guyon, Transverse effects in nematic ows, Phys. Lett. 49A (1974) 237238. M.G. Clark, F.M. Leslie, A calculation of orientational relaxation in nematic liquid crystals, Proc. R. Soc. A 361 (1978) 463485. P.J. Barratt, F.M. Leslie, Reection and refraction of an obliquely incident shear wave at a solidnematic interface, J. Phys. (Paris) 40 (C3) (1979) 7377. P. Martinoty, S. Candau, Determination of viscosity coefcients of a nematic liquid crystal using a shear wave reectance technique, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 14 (1971) 243271. F.M. Leslie, C.M. Waters, Light scattering from a nematic liquid crystal in the presence of an electric eld, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 123 (1985) 101117. S.C. Cowin, F.M. Leslie, On the kinetic energy and momenta in Cosserat continua, Z. Angew. Math. Phys. 31 (1980) 247260. F.M. Leslie, J.G. McIntosh, P.J. Kedney, Flow-induced switching in a bistable nematic device, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 330 (1999) 525 533. F.M. Leslie, J.G. McIntosh, Flow-induced surface switching in a bistable nematic device, J. Eng. Math. 37 (2000) 129142. N.A. Clark, S. Lagerwall, Submicrosecond bistable electro-optic switching in liquid crystals, Appl. Phys. Lett. 36 (1980) 899901. P.G. de Gennes, J. Prost, The Physics of Liquid Crystals, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1993. G. McKay, F.M. Leslie, A continuum theory for smectic liquid crystals allowing layer dilation and compression, Eur. J. Appl. Math. 8 (1997) 275280. C. Anderson, F.M. Leslie, A study of smectics in a conned geometry, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 330 (1999) 609616. F.M. Leslie, I.W. Stewart, M. Nakagawa, A continuum theory for smectic C liquid crystals, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 198 (1991) 443 454. F.M. Leslie, I.W. Stewart, T. Carlsson, M. Nagakawa, Equivalent smectic C liquid crystal energies, Continuum Mech. Thermodyn. 3 (1991) 237250. T. Carlsson, I.W. Stewart, F.M. Leslie, An elastic energy for the ferroelectric chiral smectic C phase, J. Phys. A 25 (1992) 2371 2374.

23

[59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67]

[68]

[69]

[70] [71]

[72] [73] [74] [75]

[80] M. Nakagawa, A theoretical study of smectic focal domains, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 59 (1990) 8189. [81] F.M. Leslie, I.W. Stewart, M. Nakagawa, Smectic liquid crystals and the parabolic cyclides, Q. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 47 (1994) 511525. [82] R.J. Atkin, I.W. Stewart, Theoretical studies of Fredericksz transitions in SmC liquid crystals, Eur. J. Appl. Math. 8 (1997) 253262. [83] G.I. Blake, F.M. Leslie, Flow and eld induced instabilities in a smectic C liquid crystal, Meccanica 31 (1996) 611621. [84] P.J. Barratt, B.R. Duffy, A backow effect in smectic C liquid crystals, Liq. Cryst. 21 (1996) 865869. [85] G.I. Blake, F.M. Leslie, Flow and backow effects in a continuum theory for smectic C liquid crystals, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 262 (1995) 403415. [86] L.J. Yu, A. Saupe, Observation of a biaxial nematic phase in potassium laurate-1-decanolwater mixtures, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45 (1980) 10001003. [87] F.M. Leslie, J.S. Laverty, T. Carlsson, Continuum theory for biaxial nematic liquid crystals, Q. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 45 (1992) 595606. [88] S. Chandrasekhar, Oral communication, in: Proceedings of the 8th Liquid Crystal Conference of Socialist Countries, Krakow, Poland (unpublished). [89] T. Carlsson, F.M. Leslie, J.S. Laverty, Biaxial nematic liquid crystals in ow: properties and evidence of bistability in the presence of electric and magnetic elds, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 212 (1992) 189 196. [90] T. Carlsson, F.M. Leslie, J.S. Laverty, Flow properties of biaxial nematic liquid crystals, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 210 (1992) 95127. [91] F.M. Leslie, Flow alignment in biaxial nematic liquid crystals, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 54 (1994) 241250. [92] R.J. Atkin, T.J. Sluckin, Frank Matthews Leslie, Biogr. Mems. Fell. R. Soc. London 49 (2003) 315333. [93] E. Govers, G. Vertogen, Elastic continuum theory of biaxial nematics, Phys. Rev. A 30 (1984) 19982000.

R.J. Atkin Department of Applied Mathematics University of Shefeld, Shefeld S3 7RH, UK T.J. Sluckin School of Mathematics, University of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK I.W. Stewart Department of Mathematics, University of Strathclyde Glasgow G1 1XH, UK Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 141 548 3665 fax: +44 141 552 8657 E-mail address: i.w.stewart@strath.ac.uk (I.W. Stewart) 29 March 2004

[76] [77]

[78]

[79]