 this mode as “anisotropic orthogonal gradients of $\hat{\bm{n}}$,” but that phrase is too long for common use. For that reason, we suggest the name “biaxial splay,” to emphasize the similarity with the symmetry of a biaxial nematic phase.

Up to now, we have not yet used the fact that the saddle-splay term is a total divergence. Because it is a total divergence, the volume integral of this term can be reduced to a surface integral. Hence, from Eq. (\[saddlesplay\]), the volume integral of $[\frac{1}{2}S^2 +\frac{1}{2}T^2 - \operatorname{Tr}(\bm{\Delta}^2)]$ can be reduced to a surface integral. In many liquid-crystal systems, that surface integral is a constant determined by the boundary conditions. In those systems, liquid-crystal theorists normally use this constraint to eliminate $\bm{\Delta}$ from the theory, and work in terms of the three remaining modes $S$, $T$, and $\bm{B}$. As an alternative, in principle, one might eliminate $S$ or $T$ from the theory, and work in terms of the other three modes.

We do not actually recommend either of those alternatives. Rather, we suggest treating all four of the modes as bulk elastic modes, and using the bulk free energy density of Eq. (\[oseenfranknew\]). This expression explicitly shows the free energy associated with each of the four modes, and it is clearly positive-definite as long as the four coefficients are positive. Moreover, it applies even to liquid-crystal systems in which the surface integral is not a constant determined by the boundary conditions, but rather is variable.

In the following sections, we discuss several problems that have been previously treated using the concept of saddle-splay as a surface integral, and re-analyze them in terms of the four bulk elastic modes. We argue that this view gives an interesting new perspective on those problems, although it still gives the same predictions for experiments.

Single vs. double deformations
==============================

Planar (single) splay
---------------------

  --------------------------------- --------------------------------- --------------------------------- ---------------------------------
     \(a) Planar (single) splay      \(b) Splay Frederiks transition   \(c) Cholesteric (single) twist   \(d) Twist Frederiks transition
  ![
this mode as “ anisotropic orthogonal gradients of $ \hat{\bm{n}}$, ” but that phrase is excessively retentive for common use. For that reason, we hint the name “ biaxial splay, ” to emphasize the similarity with the symmetry of a biaxial nematic phase. 

 Up to immediately, we have not however used the fact that the saddleback - splay term is a total discrepancy. Because it is a total divergence, the book built-in of this term can be reduced to a open integral. Hence, from Eq.   (\[saddlesplay\ ]), the bulk integral of $ [ \frac{1}{2}S^2 + \frac{1}{2}T^2 - \operatorname{Tr}(\bm{\Delta}^2)]$ can be reduced to a surface built-in. In many liquid - crystal system, that airfoil integral is a ceaseless determined by the boundary conditions. In those systems, liquid - quartz glass theorists normally use this constraint to eliminate $ \bm{\Delta}$ from the theory, and work in term of the three remaining modes $ S$, $ T$, and $ \bm{B}$. As an alternative, in principle, one might eliminate $ S$ or $ T$ from the theory, and work in terms of the other three modes. 

 We do not actually commend either of those option. Rather, we suggest treating all four of the modes as bulk elastic modality, and using the bulk free department of energy density of Eq.   (\[oseenfranknew\ ]). This formula explicitly shows the free department of energy associated with each of the four modes, and it is clearly positive - definite as long as the four coefficients are positive. Moreover, it applies even to liquid - crystal systems in which the surface built-in is not a constant specify by the boundary condition, but rather is variable. 

 In the following section, we discuss several problems that have been previously treat using the concept of saddle - splay as a surface integral, and re - analyze them in term of the four bulk elastic modes. We argue that this view gives an interesting new perspective on those problem, although it still establish the same prediction for experiments. 

 Single vs.   double deformations 
 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

 Planar (single) splay 
 --------------------- 

   --------------------------------- --------------------------------- --------------------------------- --------------------------------- 
      \(a) Planar (individual) splay       \(b) Splay Frederiks transition    \(c) Cholesteric (unmarried) twist    \(d) Twist Frederiks transition 
  ! [
 thls mode as “anisotropic ovthogonal gradieurs of $\iat{\bm{n}}$,” gut that phrase is too long for commln use. Dor that reason, we sugeest the jame “biazial wplay,” to emphasize the sjlilaxivy with the symketry of a biaxial nemathc pkase.

Up to now, we have not yet used tre fact tjat the saddle-fplaj eerm ps a total divergence. Because if is a uotal divergence, tne volume integral of this terl can be reduced tl a surface intqtral. Hence, ffom Eq. (\[saddlesplay\]), the bolume integral of $[\frac{1}{2}S^2 +\frac{1}{2}T^2 - \operctorname{Tr}(\bn{\Dwltw}^2)]$ can be rednced tj a surface lmtegran. In mamy liquid-crystsl vysrems, that surface intxgral is a constant qetermineg yy the boundary condiriins. It thmse rtstdms, lmqujd-cryshal theorists normally uwe this constraint uo qoiminate $\bm{\Demta}$ frjm the theory, and work in terms of the thgee demaining modes $S$, $T$, and $\bm{B}$. As an alternativg, in princyple, one might eliminate $S$ or $T$ from the theory, atd wock in tcrms if the other three modes.

We do not actually recoijemd either of thofe alternatovfs. Tather, we sugggst trecfihg all four of the modes ws buok elastis moces, and using the bulk free energy denspty if Eq. (\[oseenfranknew\]). This exprersiom expkicitly shows the free znergy associated with eacg of the four modds, sng it is clearly positive-desinite as lony as the fout coeffycients arf posldive. Moreover, it aoplied aven to lieuid-crystal systems in which thx surface intggrdl ps not a eonstakt determined br the boundary conditnons, bjt rather ps variabne.

In the fojlowing sectimjs, we discusv severaj priblens that fave been prevoously trvaued using rhe concept of sadvle-sklzy as a surface inuetral, and re-anakyzd trel mn tewks of the fogr bjlk rlastkc modes. We xrgur that this view givas ah interesting new levspective on thosq problems, alyhough it still giges tie samx predoctyons for experiments.

Single vs. dkuble deflrmwtions
==============================

Planar (sinnle) fplay
---------------------

  --------------------------------- --------------------------------- --------------------------------- ---------------------------------
     \(a) Planar (single) splay      \(b) Splay Frederiks transijion   \(c) Cholesteric (xlngle) twist   \(d) Trist Fredariks transition
  ![
this mode as “anisotropic orthogonal gradients of that is too for common use. the “biaxial splay,” to the similarity with symmetry of a biaxial nematic phase. to now, we have not yet used the fact that the saddle-splay term a total divergence. Because it is a total divergence, the volume integral of term be to surface integral. Hence, from Eq. (\[saddlesplay\]), the volume integral of $[\frac{1}{2}S^2 +\frac{1}{2}T^2 - \operatorname{Tr}(\bm{\Delta}^2)]$ can be to a surface integral. In many liquid-crystal systems, surface integral is a determined by the boundary conditions. those liquid-crystal theorists use constraint eliminate $\bm{\Delta}$ from theory, and work in terms of the three remaining modes $S$, $T$, and $\bm{B}$. As an alternative, principle, one $S$ or from theory, work in terms other three modes. We do not of those alternatives. Rather, we suggest treating all of the as bulk elastic modes, and using bulk free energy density of Eq. (\[oseenfranknew\]). This explicitly shows the free energy associated with each of the four modes, and it is as long as the coefficients are positive. it even liquid-crystal in which surface integral is not a constant determined by the boundary conditions, rather is variable. In the following sections, we discuss several have previously treated using concept of saddle-splay as surface and re-analyze them in the bulk argue this gives an interesting new on those problems, although it gives the same predictions deformations ============================== Planar (single) splay --------------------- --------------------------------- --------------------------------- --------------------------------- \(a) Planar (single) splay \(b) Splay transition \(c) Cholesteric (single) twist \(d) Twist Frederiks transition ![
 this mode as “anisotropic orthOgonal gradIents Of $\hAt{\bM{n}}$,” But tHat pHrase is too long FOr coMmon use. For that reason, we SuggeSt THe naME “bIaxiaL splay,” tO EmPHAsiZe ThE siMiLArIty wiTh tHe symmeTry of a biaxIal NeMatic phase.

Up TO nOw, we have noT yeT used the fact ThaT the saDdLe-sPLay teRm iS a totAl diveRGence. BEcause it iS a TOtal diVErgence, THE vOlumE integral of this teRM cAN be reduced to a sUrface InTEgRAL. HeNce, From Eq. (\[saddLeSplay\]), THe volumE InTEGRal OF $[\frac{1}{2}S^2 +\frac{1}{2}T^2 - \opEratorname{TR}(\Bm{\DElta}^2)]$ caN bE reDUced to A surfAcE IntEgral. In many LiquId-crystal SystemS, That surFAce inteGral is A coNstAnt dETeRmIneD bY The BOuNdaRY coNditions. in ThOse syStemS, LIQUid-cRysTal tHeoriSts normally usE thIs coNStrAint tO elimInatE $\bM{\DeltA}$ from tHe theOrY, and work in terms Of thE three remAinInG moDeS $S$, $T$, anD $\Bm{B}$. As aN alTerNative, iN princiPLe, oNe MIGHt Eliminate $S$ or $T$ from tHe THEoRy, and worK in terMS oF tHE other thReE moDes.

WE DO not aCtuaLLy RecommenD eitheR Of ThOse alteRnAtives. raTheR, we SuggeST treAting aLl four of The moDEs as bulk elastiC Modes, and using THe BULk FRee eNerGy density of eq. (\[osEEnfrAnknEW\]). THis EXpresSion eXpLIcITly shows the free enerGy AssociAted wIth each of the fOur modes, anD IT Is clearlY posITiVE-definite as lonG as thE four coeffICients arE posiTive. MoreOver, it appLIEs even to LiqUid-CryStaL SYsTems in which thE SUrfaCe IntegraL is Not a conStaNt dEteRmiNeD by the bouNdary conDiTiOnS, bUt rAther IS variablE.

IN thE fOllOwing SEctionS, we diScusS sEvERal ProblemS ThAT Have BeEn PrevIouSlY treaTed uSIng The concEpt of saddLe-sPLay aS a SuRface inTegral, and re-anAlYze them in tErMs oF the foUR Bulk elasTic modes. We argue that this VIew giveS an InterEstiNg new persPecTive on ThoSE problEms, altHough It StiLL Gives THE sAme PrEdictions fOR ExpErimeNtS.

SinGle vs. doUble deformations
==============================

PlANar (Single) splay
---------------------

  --------------------------------- --------------------------------- --------------------------------- ---------------------------------
     \(a) PLanAr (siNGLe) SplAY      \(b) sPlaY FREdeRIKs transition   \(c) ChOlesteric (sInGLe) Twist   \(d) TwisT freDeRiks traNsition
  ![
 this mode as “anisotropic  orthogona l gra die nts  o f $\ hat{ \bm{n}}$,” but that  phrase is too long fo r com mo n  use .  F or th at reas o n, w e s ug ge stth e  n ame “ bia xial sp lay,” to e mph as ize the simi l ar ity with t hesymmetry ofa b iaxial  n ema t ic ph ase .

Up  to no w , we h ave not y et used t h e factt h at  the  saddle-splay ter m  i s  a total diver gence.  B e ca u s e i t i s a totaldi verge n ce, the vo l u m e i n tegral of thi s term canb e r educed  t o a surfac e int eg r al.  Hence, fro m Eq . (\[sadd lespla y \]), th e  volume  integ ral  of  $[\ f ra c{ 1}{ 2} S ^2+ \f rac { 1}{ 2}T^2 -\o pe rator name { T r } (\bm {\D elta }^2)] $ can be redu ced  toa  su rface  inte gral .In ma ny liq uid-c ry stal systems, t hatsurface i nte gr alis  a co n stantdet erm ined by  the bo u nda ry c o nd itions. In those s ys t e ms , liquid -cryst a lth e orists n or mal ly u s e  this  con s tr aint toelimin a te  $ \bm{\De lt a}$ fr om  th e t heory ,  and  workin terms  of t h e three remain i ng modes $S$, $T $ ,  a n d $\ bm{ B}$. As analte r nati ve,i npri n ciple , one  m i gh t  eliminate $S$ or $ T$  fromthe t heory, and wo rk in term s o f the ot hert hr e e modes.

We d o not  actuallyr ecommend  eith er of th ose alter n a tives. R ath er,  we  su g g es t treating al l four  o f the m ode s as bu lkela sti c m od es, and u sing the  b ul kfr eeenerg y  density  o f E q.  (\ [osee n frankn ew\]) . Th is  e x pre ssion e x pl i c itly  s ho ws t hefr ee en ergy ass ociated  with eac h o f  the  f ou r modes , and it is c le arly posit iv e-d efinit e as longas the four coefficient s  are po sit ive.More over, itapp lies e ven to liq uid-cr ystal  s yst e m s inw h ic h t he  surface i n t egr al is  n ot a  consta nt determined by t h e b oundary condi tio ns,b u trat h er isva r iab l e .

In the follo wing secti on s ,we discuss sev er al prob lems th at ha v e beenpreviousl y treated  u sing t heconcept of  saddle- splay asa  surf a ce  inte gra l, and  r e-a nalyz e them interms  of th efour b ulk e la stic mod es. We argue that thisview g ivesaninteresti ngn ewperspecti ve o n those pr obl ems , alt hou g h itstil l  g ive s  thesame predictio n sfor e xp eriments.
S i n gle  vs.dou b le def orma tions
=========== = ============== ==== Pla nar (sin gl e) splay
----- --- -- - - -------- -
  -------- -------- -- - ----- ------ --- -- ------- - - -- - ------ ---- --- ------ -- --- -- - ------- -- -- - ------ ---- -- - ---- ------ - ---- - - ---------------- 
   \ (a) P l ana r (si ng le) spl a y     \(b) Sp lay Frederi ks tra nsit ion  \(c) C ho lester ic(s ingle) twi s t   \(d)Twist  Freder ik s tr ans ition  ![ 
 this_mode as_“anisotropic orthogonal gradients of_$\hat{\bm{n}}$,” but_that_phrase is_too_long for common_use. For that_reason, we suggest the_name “biaxial splay,”_to_emphasize the similarity with the symmetry of a biaxial nematic phase.

Up to now, we_have_not yet_used_the_fact that the saddle-splay term_is a total divergence. Because_it is_a total divergence, the volume integral of this_term_can be reduced_to a surface integral. Hence, from Eq. (\[saddlesplay\]), the volume_integral of $[\frac{1}{2}S^2 +\frac{1}{2}T^2 - \operatorname{Tr}(\bm{\Delta}^2)]$_can be reduced_to_a_surface integral. In many_liquid-crystal systems, that surface integral is_a constant determined by the boundary_conditions. In those systems, liquid-crystal theorists normally_use this constraint to eliminate $\bm{\Delta}$_from the theory, and work_in terms_of the three remaining modes_$S$, $T$, and_$\bm{B}$. As_an alternative, in_principle, one might eliminate $S$ or_$T$ from the_theory, and work in terms of_the_other three modes.

We_do_not_actually recommend_either of those_alternatives._Rather, we_suggest_treating all four of the modes_as_bulk elastic modes, and using the bulk_free energy density of_Eq. (\[oseenfranknew\])._This expression explicitly shows_the free energy associated with_each of the four modes, and_it is_clearly positive-definite_as long as the four coefficients are positive. Moreover, it applies_even to liquid-crystal systems in which_the surface integral is_not a_constant_determined by the_boundary_conditions, but_rather is variable.

In the following sections, we_discuss several_problems that have been previously treated_using the concept of_saddle-splay_as a surface integral, and re-analyze_them in terms of the four_bulk elastic modes. We argue_that_this_view gives an interesting new_perspective on those problems, although it_still gives the_same predictions for experiments.

Single vs. double deformations
==============================

Planar (single)_splay
---------------------

_ --------------------------------- --------------------------------- --------------------------------- ---------------------------------
 __  \(a) Planar (single) splay___   \(b) Splay_Frederiks transition   \(c) Cholesteric_(single) twist   \(d) Twist Frederiks transition
 _![