deletions | additions       diff --git a/Payam.tex b/Payam.tex  index c66a19a..43dc1b2 100644  --- a/Payam.tex  +++ b/Payam.tex 
...
\begin{itemize}  \item The two $t_{\rm h}$s are measuring different things. Payam's $t_{\rm h}$ is considering the {\it diffusion }of a particle's momentum: the characteristic time in the velocity autocorrelation. My $t_{\rm h}$ is about information flow via sonic waves: this is much smaller than the vorticity time-scale.  \item {\it What should the time-scale be from physical reasoning: what is the physics behind establishing the flow profile $\vec{v}(\vec{x})$ in the fluid around the DNA/jet? (Read \citet{Broman_Rudenko_2010}, \citet{1959flme.book.....L} pp. 86-88).\\ 86-88).}     \item {\it  Which process (sound or vorticity) carries more momentum?} Read \citet{1959flme.book.....L}, chapter 8, on sound. \item {\it Does Payam assume incompressible flow?} Yes -- he follows \citet{1959flme.book.....L} pp. 86-88 in setting up the submerged jet; and they assume zero divergence in the velocity field \& use stress tensor for incompressible flow. (The derivation in \citet{Broman_Rudenko_2010} also assumes incompressibility.) This means that the sound speed in his model will be infinite!\\  {\it Would there be any point in re-visiting the derivation with incompressibility assumption dropped?}