chapter 3 section 3.2 subsection 3.2.4



HIGH DENSITY LIMIT

 

Figure:  Schematically drawn scaled configuration of the (2D) square-well solid in the limit . The lines of the hexagons give the momentary boundary of the cell to which a particle is confined. All the cells are scaled up to finite size, as the cells are infinitely small in the limit . The cell boundaries will change position if the nearest neighbors move. The arrows give the particle displacement from their original lattice positions. In the shaded area the particles are within the interaction range of their neighbors.

The simulations discussed above seem to indicate that there is a solid-solid transition even in the limit where . At first sight this seems surprising, because one would not expect an infinitely narrow potential well to affect the phase behavior at finite temperature. However, at close packing, even an infinitely narrow potential will give a finite contribution to the potential energy. Surprisingly, it turns out that it is possible to perform simulations of the phase behavior in the limit . To see how this can be achieved, it is convenient to consider first the more general case that is finite. In the dense crystalline solid, any given particle i is constrained to move in the vicinity of its lattice site - i.e. its average position - . In that case, we can re-express the potential energy as a function of the displacement of the particles, from their respective lattice sites: . The potential energy of a pair of particles can then be written as

 

where we have used the obvious notation . For nearest neighbors, at close packing. At lower densities, where a has been defined in eqn. 3.6. The potential energy of a pair of square-well particles is a function of , We can now express in terms of and . This yields the following result for

 

where is a unit vector in the direction of and . In the limit takes on a very simple form

 

In this limit, the square-well model is equivalent to a lattice model, with a fixed, but arbitrary lattice spacing as shown in figure 3.4. The state at every lattice point i is characterized by a scaled displacement vector . Note that a finite corresponds to an infinitesimal real displacement . The nearest-neighbor interaction is a function of . Clearly, the density in the original square-well model now only enters in the problem through the parameter . We can now perform Monte Carlo simulations on this lattice model by moving a randomly selected atom i from its initial scaled displacement to the trial displacement in such a way that microscopic reversibility is satisfied.

 


: Solid-solid coexistence curves in the plane (see text). The upper figure shows the binodal in the limit =0, while the bottom figure shows that all the scaled binodals for finite 0.07 very nearly coincide with the binodal for =0.

Knowledge of the new scaled displacement of atom i is sufficient to compute the change in potential energy associated with the trial move, using eqns

3.7 - 3.9 above. We now use the conventional Metropolis rule to accept or reject the trial move. By combining the results of a series of simulations for a range of values of and a range of temperatures (twenty temperatures and thirty values for every temperature) with the hard-sphere equation of state near close packing [57], we can compute the free energy of this model system as a function of temperature and volume by thermodynamic integration and construct the solid-solid phase diagram in the limit =0. In the plane, the binodal would simply be a vertical line segment at close packing ending in a critical point. It is more convenient to plot the binodal as a function of . In figure 3.5, the solid-solid binodal is plotted in the plane. As can be seen from the figure the critical temperature is indeed finite. Moreover, the binodal becomes quite symmetric in this representation compared to figure 3.2.
It is interesting to consider the square-well solid at finite in terms of the lattice model described above. As can be seen from eqn. 3.7 and eqn. 3.8, the potential energy now is a function not only of and but also of . If the free energy of the system is an analytic function of , we could expand in powers of it around the limit =0. However, the solid-solid transition only occurs for 0.06. Hence, is always a small parameter. It is therefore likely that the phase diagram of the square-well model, when plotted as a function of differs only little from the behavior in the limit . As can be seen from figure 3.5 this is indeed the case.

It is interesting to point out the relation between the square-well model in the limit =0 and the adhesive hard-sphere model proposed by Baxter [51]. The adhesive hard-sphere model is obtained from the square-well model by considering the limit such that . This limiting procedure results in a model that has a finite second virial coefficient at finite temperature. Usually, the ratio of the second virial coefficient of the adhesive hard-sphere to that of ``non-sticky'' hard spheres is used to relate the parameter to observable quantities:

The adhesive hard sphere system has been studied extensively, both theoretically [58,59,60] and numerically [61,62]. In particular, the liquid-vapor critical point of this model has been predicted to occur at 0.097 [58]. However, if we identify the adhesive hard-sphere model with the square-well model in the limit , then the present simulations show that this model already has a solid-solid transition for , i.e. for . At all finite temperatures (finite ) the only stable phases are the close-packed solid and the infinitely dilute gas. Hence, all other phases of the adhesive hard-sphere model are, at best, metastable. In fact, Stell [63] has already indicated that the monodisperse adhesive hard-sphere model is pathological because the virial coefficient diverges. This divergence could be removed by introducing a slight size polydispersity into the model. Such polydispersity would also affect the solid-solid transition. In fact, a rough estimate of the phase-diagram suggest that in that case, the solid-fluid transition occurs at finite , and hence the phase diagram of the slightly polydisperse adhesive hard sphere model is non-trivial.



chapter 3 section 3.2 subsection 3.2.4


Peter Bolhuis
Tue Sep 24 20:44:02 MDT 1996