Self-Diffusion, two versions of mean square displacement

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the definitions of mean square displacement (MSD) in self-diffusion theory, highlighting two primary formulations: the integral version = (1/N) ∫ d ) and the summation version = (1/N) Σ_i^N . The integral formulation is primarily used in theoretical derivations, while the summation version is applied in practical scenarios, suggesting it serves as an approximation. The conversation also references the test-particle method and its connection to Monte Carlo simulations and the Langevin equation, emphasizing the computational aspect of solving transport equations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of self-diffusion theory
  • Familiarity with mean square displacement (MSD) concepts
  • Knowledge of Monte Carlo simulations
  • Basic grasp of the Langevin equation and Fokker-Planck equation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the test-particle method in detail
  • Explore Monte Carlo simulation techniques for diffusion processes
  • Learn about the Langevin equation and its applications in statistical mechanics
  • Investigate the Fokker-Planck equation and its relationship to diffusion
USEFUL FOR

Researchers and students in physics, particularly those focusing on statistical mechanics, diffusion processes, and computational methods in transport theory.

Derivator
Messages
147
Reaction score
0
Dear all,

in self diffusion theory you can see in different books, different definitions of the mean square displacement:

[itex]<r(t)^2> = \frac{1}{N} \int d\vec{r} \ \vec{r}(t)^2 c( \vec{r} ,t)[/itex]
where c(r,t) is the particle concentration and N the number of particles.
or

[itex]<r(t)^2> = \frac{1}{N}\sum_i^N \vec{r}_i(t)^2[/itex]

In all theoretical derivations, only the integral version is used whereas in practical / applied treatements of self diffusion, the sum version is used. This is why I assume, the sum version is an approximation to the integral version. But I don't see it.
derivator

Edit:
See for example:
the sum version (formula 2.2): http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/nuclear-...of-transport-fall-2003/lecture-notes/lec2.pdf
the integral version (formula 12.4): http://books.google.de/books?id=PTO...sion mean square&pg=PA124#v=onepage&q&f=false
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is known as the test-particle method. The idea behind this method is to describe the diffusion of the particles, e.g., in an suspension by the motion of test particles under the influence of a friction force (the average force from many collisions of the fluid molecules of with the particle) and a fluctuating random force. This is the Langevin equation. This you do many times in a Monte Carlo simulation which gives trajectories [itex](\vec{\xi}(t),\vec{\pi}(t))[/itex] in phase space. The concentration is then given by the test-particle ansatz,

[tex]c(t,\vec{x},\vec{p})=\frac{N}{N_e} \sum_{i=1}^{N_e} \delta^{(3)}[\vec{x}-\vec{\xi}_i(t)] \delta^{(3)}[\vec{p}-\vec{\pi}_i(t)],[/tex]

where [itex]N[/itex] is the number of suspended particles and [itex]N_e[/itex] is the number of test particles, i.e., the ensemble size.

Of course the concentration as function of space alone is given by

[tex]c(t,\vec{x})=\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \mathrm{d}^3 \vec{p} c(t,\vec{x},\vec{p}).[/tex]

Now, if you plug in the test-particle ansatz for [itex]c(t,\vec{x})[/itex] into the equation for average quantities, you get your second equation.

The Monte Carlo statistics given by the Langevin equation, is by the way equivalent to the Fokker-Planck equation (or diffusion equation) for the concentration, which is a deterministic partial differential equation (transport equation).

The whole trick of test particles is that you can put them on a computer to solve the transport equation.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
18K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K