Poisson equation solutions

This justifies the use of the simpler language over the one. The solution of the Poisson equation and the boundary conditions used are explained in detail elsewhere [55]. Here, we will present some selected results. 

Davis, M. E., McCammon, J. A. Dielectric boundary smoothing in finite difference solutions of the poisson equation An approach to improve accuracy and convergence. J. Comp. Chem. 12 (1991) 909-912. 

Another way of calculating the electrostatic component of solvation uses the Poisson-Boltzmann equations [22, 23]. This formalism, which is also frequently applied to biological macromolecules, treats the solvent as a high-dielectric continuum, whereas the solute is considered as an array of point charges in a constant, low-dielectric medium. Changes of the potential within a medium with the dielectric constant e can be related to the charge density p according to the Poisson equation (Eq. (41)). 

The final class of methods that we shall consider for calculating the electrostatic compone of the solvation free energy are based upon the Poisson or the Poisson-Boltzmann equatior Ihese methods have been particularly useful for investigating the electrostatic properties biological macromolecules such as proteins and DNA. The solute is treated as a body of co stant low dielectric (usually between 2 and 4), and the solvent is modelled as a continuum high dielectric. The Poisson equation relates the variation in the potential (f> within a mediu of uniform dielectric constant e to the charge density p ... 

The Poisson equation assumes that the solvent is completely homogeneous. However, a solvent can have a significant amount of charge separation. An example of a heterogeneous solution would be a polar solute molecule surrounded by water with NaCl in solution. The positive sodium and negative... 

The LSDA approach requires simultaneous self-consistent solutions of the Schrbdinger and Poisson equations. This was accomplished using the Layer Korringa-Kohn-Rostoker technique which has many useful features for calculations of properties of layered systems. It is, for example, one of only a few electronic structure techniques that can treat non-periodic infinite systems. It also has the virtue that the computational time required for a calculation scales linearly with the number of different layers, not as the third power as most other techniques. 

In principle, the task of solving a linear algebraic systems seems trivial, as with Gauss elimination a solution method exists which allows one to solve a problem of dimension N (i.e. N equations with N unknowns) at a cost of O(N ) elementary operations [85]. Such solution methods which, apart from roundoff errors and machine accuracy, produce an exact solution of an equation system after a predetermined number of operations, are called direct solvers. However, for problems related to the solution of partial differential equations, direct solvers are usually very inefficient Methods such as Gauss elimination do not exploit a special feature of the coefficient matrices of the corresponding linear systems, namely that most of the entries are zero. Such sparse matrices are characteristic of problems originating from the discretization of partial or ordinary differential equations. As an example, consider the discretization of the one-dimensional Poisson equation... 

Especially for the electrons, the fluid model has the advantage of a lower computational effort than the PIC/MC method. Their low mass (high values of the transport coefficients) and consequent high velocities give rise to small time steps in the numerical simulation (uAf < Aa) if a so-called explicit method is used. This restriction is easily eliminated within the fluid model by use of an implicit method. Also, the electron density is strongly coupled with the electric field, which results in numerical Instabilities. This requires a simultaneous implicit solution of the Poisson equation for the electric field and the transport equation for the electron density. This solution can be deployed within the fluid model and gives a considerable reduction of computational effort as compared to a nonsi-multaneous solution procedure [179]. Within the PIC method, only fully explicit methods can be applied. 

A rigorous solution of this problem was attempted, for example, in the hard sphere approximation by D. Henderson, L. Blum, and others. Here the discussion will be limited to the classical Gouy-Chapman theory, describing conditions between the bulk of the solution and the outer Helmholtz plane and considering the ions as point charges and the solvent as a structureless dielectric of permittivity e. The inner electrical potential 0(1) of the bulk of the solution will be taken as zero and the potential in the outer Helmholtz plane will be denoted as 02. The space charge in the diffuse layer is given by the Poisson equation... 

The description of the properties of this region is based on the solution of the Poisson equation (Eqs 4.3.2 and 4.3.3). For an intrinsic semiconductor where the only charge carriers are electrons and holes present in the conductivity or valence band, respectively, the result is given directly by Eq. (4.3.11) with the electrolyte concentration c replaced by the ratio n°/NA, where n is the concentration of electrons in 1 cm3 of the semiconductor in a region without an electric field (in solid-state physics, concentrations are expressed in terms of the number of particles per unit volume). 

An alternative to the GB, COSMO, and Poisson electrostatic calculations is to model the solution to the Poisson equation in terms of pair potentials between solute atoms this procedure is based on the physical picture that the solvent screens the intra-solute Coulombic interactions of the solute, except for the critical descreening of one part of the solute from the solvent by another part of this solute. This descreening can be modeled in an average way to a certain level of accuracy by pairwise functions of atomic positions.18, M 65 One can obtain quite accurate solvation energies in this way, and it has recently been shown that this algorithm provides a satisfactory alternative to more expensive explicit-solvent simulations even for the demanding cases of 10-base-pair duplexes of DNA and RNA in water.66... 

The electrostatic methods just discussed suitable for nonelectrolytic solvent. However, both the GB and Poisson approaches may be extended to salt solutions, the former by introducing a Debye-Huckel parameter67 and the latter by generalizing the Poisson equation to the Poisson-Boltzmann equation.68 The Debye-Huckel modification of the GB model is valid to much higher salt concentrations than the original Debye-Huckel theory because the model includes the finite size of the solute molecules. 

In this framework, we have developed an analytical model based on a self-consistent solution of the Poisson equation using an adiabatic approximation for laser generated fast electrons [75], This model, briefly outlined in the following, allows the determination of the optimal target thickness to optimize the maximum proton (and ion) energies, as well as the particle number as a function of given UHC laser pulse parameters. 

E-A. Numerical or analytic solution of the classical electrostatic problem (e.g., Poisson equation) with homogeneous dielectric constant for solvent. 

---