Lennard-Jones solvent

Figure 4. Demixing temperatures for Lennard-Jones polymer in Lennard-Jones solvent at P, = 2 as a function of polymer concentration for 16-mers (circles) and 64-mers (triangles). Temperature and pressure units are relative to the critical solvent properties. The Lennard-Jones interaction potential energy is cut at 2.5a and shifted [80].

The first molecular dynamics simulations of bimolecular reactions in solution were those of Wilson, Hynes, and co-workers on an A -I- BC —> AB -I- C atom exchange reaction in rare gas solution. - The short-range Lennard-Jones solvent-solute interactions and intrasolvent interactions simplify the interpretation of the reaction dynamics. 

It is difficult to point to the basic reason why the average-potential model is not better applicable to metallic solutions. Shimoji60 believes that a Lennard-Jones 6-12 potential is not adequate for metals and that a Morse potential would give better results when incorporated in the same kind of model. On the other hand, it is possible that the main trouble is that metal solutions do not obey a theorem of corresponding states. More specifically, the interaction eAB(r) may not be expressible by the same function as for the pure components because the solute is so strongly modified by the solvent. This point of view is supported by considerations of the electronic models of metal solutions.46 The idea that the solvent strongly modifies the solute metal is reached also through a consideration of the quasi-chemical theory applied to dilute solutions. This is the topic that we consider next. 

The elasticity can be related to very different contributions to the energy of the interface. It includes classical and nonclassical (exchange, correlation) electrostatic interactions in ion-electron systems, entropic effects, Lennard-Jones and van der Waals-type interactions between solvent molecules and electrode, etc. Therefore, use of the macroscopic term should not hide its relation to microscopic reality. On the other hand, microscopic behavior could be much richer than the predictions of such simplified electroelastic models. Some of these differences will be discussed below. 

Multiparticle collision dynamics provides an ideal way to simulate the motion of small self-propelled objects since the interaction between the solvent and the motor can be specified and hydrodynamic effects are taken into account automatically. It has been used to investigate the self-propelled motion of swimmers composed of linked beads that undergo non-time-reversible cyclic motion [116] and chemically powered nanodimers [117]. The chemically powered nanodimers can serve as models for the motions of the bimetallic nanodimers discussed earlier. The nanodimers are made from two spheres separated by a fixed distance R dissolved in a solvent of A and B molecules. One dimer sphere (C) catalyzes the irreversible reaction A + C B I C, while nonreactive interactions occur with the noncatalytic sphere (N). The nanodimer and reactive events are shown in Fig. 22. The A and B species interact with the nanodimer spheres through repulsive Lennard-Jones (LJ) potentials in Eq. (76). The MPC simulations assume that the potentials satisfy Vca = Vcb = Vna, with c.,t and Vnb with 3- The A molecules react to form B molecules when they approach the catalytic sphere within the interaction distance r < rc. The B molecules produced in the reaction interact differently with the catalytic and noncatalytic spheres. 

We assume for simplicity that the solvent is pure water, and that only the water-oxygen atoms have explicit Lennard-Jones interactions with the solute (this is typical of several common water models). We have seen that AWnp can be viewed as the free energy to change A from zero to one. Therefore, a well-known thermodynamic integration formula gives... 

These models retain the form of the nonbonded interaction used in the chemically realistic modeling, i.e., they use either an interaction of the Lennard-Jones or of the exponential-6 type. The repulsive parts of these potentials generate the necessary local excluded volume, whereas the attractive long-range parts can be used to model varying solvent quality for dilute or semi-dilute solutions and to generate a reasonable equation-of-state behavior for polymeric melts. 

A key to both methods is the force field that is used,65 or more precisely, the inter- and possibly intramolecular potentials, from which can be obtained the forces acting upon the particles and the total energy of the system. An elementary level is to take only solute-solvent intermolecular interactions into account. These are typically viewed as being electrostatic and dispersion/exchange-repulsion (sometimes denoted van der Waals) they are represented by Coulombic and (frequently) Lennard-Jones expressions ... 

We now present results from molecular dynamics simulations in which all the chain monomers are coupled to a heat bath. The chains interact via the repiflsive portion of a shifted Lennard-Jones potential with a Lennard-Jones diameter a, which corresponds to a good solvent situation. For the bond potential between adjacent polymer segments we take a FENE (nonhnear bond) potential which gives an average nearest-neighbor monomer-monomer separation of typically a 0.97cr. In the simulation box with a volume LxL kLz there are 50 (if not stated otherwise) chains each of which consists of N -i-1... 

Solvent. The water molecules conformed to the Simple Point (Jbarge Extended model (SPC/E) (4), which is summarized in Table I. The non-polar" solvents were taken as monoatomic non-charged atomic liquids with the same Lennard-Jones (6-12) parameters as oxygen in water, making an argon-like solvent. 

---