ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | View Changeset | Root Listing
root/group/trunk/tengDissertation/Introduction.tex
(Generate patch)

Comparing trunk/tengDissertation/Introduction.tex (file contents):
Revision 2695 by tim, Thu Apr 6 04:07:57 2006 UTC vs.
Revision 2907 by tim, Thu Jun 29 16:57:37 2006 UTC

# Line 3 | Line 3 | Mechanics}
3   \section{\label{introSection:classicalMechanics}Classical
4   Mechanics}
5  
6 < Closely related to Classical Mechanics, Molecular Dynamics
7 < simulations are carried out by integrating the equations of motion
8 < for a given system of particles. There are three fundamental ideas
9 < behind classical mechanics. Firstly, One can determine the state of
10 < a mechanical system at any time of interest; Secondly, all the
11 < mechanical properties of the system at that time can be determined
12 < by combining the knowledge of the properties of the system with the
13 < specification of this state; Finally, the specification of the state
14 < when further combine with the laws of mechanics will also be
15 < sufficient to predict the future behavior of the system.
6 > Using equations of motion derived from Classical Mechanics,
7 > Molecular Dynamics simulations are carried out by integrating the
8 > equations of motion for a given system of particles. There are three
9 > fundamental ideas behind classical mechanics. Firstly, one can
10 > determine the state of a mechanical system at any time of interest;
11 > Secondly, all the mechanical properties of the system at that time
12 > can be determined by combining the knowledge of the properties of
13 > the system with the specification of this state; Finally, the
14 > specification of the state when further combined with the laws of
15 > mechanics will also be sufficient to predict the future behavior of
16 > the system.
17  
18   \subsection{\label{introSection:newtonian}Newtonian Mechanics}
19   The discovery of Newton's three laws of mechanics which govern the
20   motion of particles is the foundation of the classical mechanics.
21 < Newton¡¯s first law defines a class of inertial frames. Inertial
21 > Newton's first law defines a class of inertial frames. Inertial
22   frames are reference frames where a particle not interacting with
23   other bodies will move with constant speed in the same direction.
24 < With respect to inertial frames Newton¡¯s second law has the form
24 > With respect to inertial frames, Newton's second law has the form
25   \begin{equation}
26 < F = \frac {dp}{dt} = \frac {mv}{dt}
26 > F = \frac {dp}{dt} = \frac {mdv}{dt}
27   \label{introEquation:newtonSecondLaw}
28   \end{equation}
29   A point mass interacting with other bodies moves with the
30   acceleration along the direction of the force acting on it. Let
31 < $F_ij$ be the force that particle $i$ exerts on particle $j$, and
32 < $F_ji$ be the force that particle $j$ exerts on particle $i$.
33 < Newton¡¯s third law states that
31 > $F_{ij}$ be the force that particle $i$ exerts on particle $j$, and
32 > $F_{ji}$ be the force that particle $j$ exerts on particle $i$.
33 > Newton's third law states that
34   \begin{equation}
35 < F_ij = -F_ji
35 > F_{ij} = -F_{ji}.
36   \label{introEquation:newtonThirdLaw}
37   \end{equation}
37
38   Conservation laws of Newtonian Mechanics play very important roles
39   in solving mechanics problems. The linear momentum of a particle is
40   conserved if it is free or it experiences no force. The second
# Line 46 | Line 46 | The torque $\tau$ with respect to the same origin is d
46   \end{equation}
47   The torque $\tau$ with respect to the same origin is defined to be
48   \begin{equation}
49 < N \equiv r \times F \label{introEquation:torqueDefinition}
49 > \tau \equiv r \times F \label{introEquation:torqueDefinition}
50   \end{equation}
51   Differentiating Eq.~\ref{introEquation:angularMomentumDefinition},
52   \[
# Line 59 | Line 59 | thus,
59   \]
60   thus,
61   \begin{equation}
62 < \dot L = r \times \dot p = N
62 > \dot L = r \times \dot p = \tau
63   \end{equation}
64   If there are no external torques acting on a body, the angular
65   momentum of it is conserved. The last conservation theorem state
66 < that if all forces are conservative, Energy $E = T + V$ is
67 < conserved. All of these conserved quantities are important factors
68 < to determine the quality of numerical integration scheme for rigid
69 < body \cite{Dullweber1997}.
66 > that if all forces are conservative, energy is conserved,
67 > \begin{equation}E = T + V. \label{introEquation:energyConservation}
68 > \end{equation}
69 > All of these conserved quantities are important factors to determine
70 > the quality of numerical integration schemes for rigid bodies
71 > \cite{Dullweber1997}.
72  
73   \subsection{\label{introSection:lagrangian}Lagrangian Mechanics}
74  
75 < Newtonian Mechanics suffers from two important limitations: it
76 < describes their motion in special cartesian coordinate systems.
77 < Another limitation of Newtonian mechanics becomes obvious when we
78 < try to describe systems with large numbers of particles. It becomes
79 < very difficult to predict the properties of the system by carrying
80 < out calculations involving the each individual interaction between
81 < all the particles, even if we know all of the details of the
80 < interaction. In order to overcome some of the practical difficulties
81 < which arise in attempts to apply Newton's equation to complex
82 < system, alternative procedures may be developed.
75 > Newtonian Mechanics suffers from an important limitation: motion can
76 > only be described in cartesian coordinate systems which make it
77 > impossible to predict analytically the properties of the system even
78 > if we know all of the details of the interaction. In order to
79 > overcome some of the practical difficulties which arise in attempts
80 > to apply Newton's equation to complex systems, approximate numerical
81 > procedures may be developed.
82  
83 < \subsubsection{\label{introSection:halmiltonPrinciple}Hamilton's
84 < Principle}
83 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:halmiltonPrinciple}\textbf{Hamilton's
84 > Principle}}
85  
86   Hamilton introduced the dynamical principle upon which it is
87 < possible to base all of mechanics and, indeed, most of classical
88 < physics. Hamilton's Principle may be stated as follow,
89 <
90 < The actual trajectory, along which a dynamical system may move from
91 < one point to another within a specified time, is derived by finding
92 < the path which minimizes the time integral of the difference between
94 < the kinetic, $K$, and potential energies, $U$ \cite{tolman79}.
87 > possible to base all of mechanics and most of classical physics.
88 > Hamilton's Principle may be stated as follows: the trajectory, along
89 > which a dynamical system may move from one point to another within a
90 > specified time, is derived by finding the path which minimizes the
91 > time integral of the difference between the kinetic $K$, and
92 > potential energies $U$,
93   \begin{equation}
94 < \delta \int_{t_1 }^{t_2 } {(K - U)dt = 0} ,
94 > \delta \int_{t_1 }^{t_2 } {(K - U)dt = 0}.
95   \label{introEquation:halmitonianPrinciple1}
96   \end{equation}
99
97   For simple mechanical systems, where the forces acting on the
98 < different part are derivable from a potential and the velocities are
99 < small compared with that of light, the Lagrangian function $L$ can
100 < be define as the difference between the kinetic energy of the system
104 < and its potential energy,
98 > different parts are derivable from a potential, the Lagrangian
99 > function $L$ can be defined as the difference between the kinetic
100 > energy of the system and its potential energy,
101   \begin{equation}
102 < L \equiv K - U = L(q_i ,\dot q_i ) ,
102 > L \equiv K - U = L(q_i ,\dot q_i ).
103   \label{introEquation:lagrangianDef}
104   \end{equation}
105 < then Eq.~\ref{introEquation:halmitonianPrinciple1} becomes
105 > Thus, Eq.~\ref{introEquation:halmitonianPrinciple1} becomes
106   \begin{equation}
107 < \delta \int_{t_1 }^{t_2 } {L dt = 0} ,
107 > \delta \int_{t_1 }^{t_2 } {L dt = 0} .
108   \label{introEquation:halmitonianPrinciple2}
109   \end{equation}
110  
111 < \subsubsection{\label{introSection:equationOfMotionLagrangian}The
112 < Equations of Motion in Lagrangian Mechanics}
111 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:equationOfMotionLagrangian}\textbf{The
112 > Equations of Motion in Lagrangian Mechanics}}
113  
114 < for a holonomic system of $f$ degrees of freedom, the equations of
115 < motion in the Lagrangian form is
114 > For a system of $f$ degrees of freedom, the equations of motion in
115 > the Lagrangian form is
116   \begin{equation}
117   \frac{d}{{dt}}\frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial \dot q_i }} -
118   \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial q_i }} = 0,{\rm{ }}i = 1, \ldots,f
# Line 130 | Line 126 | classical mechanics. If the potential energy of a syst
126   Arising from Lagrangian Mechanics, Hamiltonian Mechanics was
127   introduced by William Rowan Hamilton in 1833 as a re-formulation of
128   classical mechanics. If the potential energy of a system is
129 < independent of generalized velocities, the generalized momenta can
134 < be defined as
129 > independent of velocities, the momenta can be defined as
130   \begin{equation}
131   p_i = \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot q_i}
132   \label{introEquation:generalizedMomenta}
# Line 141 | Line 136 | p_i  = \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial q_i }}
136   p_i  = \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial q_i }}
137   \label{introEquation:generalizedMomentaDot}
138   \end{equation}
144
139   With the help of the generalized momenta, we may now define a new
140   quantity $H$ by the equation
141   \begin{equation}
# Line 149 | Line 143 | where $ \dot q_1  \ldots \dot q_f $ are generalized ve
143   \label{introEquation:hamiltonianDefByLagrangian}
144   \end{equation}
145   where $ \dot q_1  \ldots \dot q_f $ are generalized velocities and
146 < $L$ is the Lagrangian function for the system.
147 <
154 < Differentiating Eq.~\ref{introEquation:hamiltonianDefByLagrangian},
155 < one can obtain
146 > $L$ is the Lagrangian function for the system. Differentiating
147 > Eq.~\ref{introEquation:hamiltonianDefByLagrangian}, one can obtain
148   \begin{equation}
149   dH = \sum\limits_k {\left( {p_k d\dot q_k  + \dot q_k dp_k  -
150   \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial q_k }}dq_k  - \frac{{\partial
151   L}}{{\partial \dot q_k }}d\dot q_k } \right)}  - \frac{{\partial
152 < L}}{{\partial t}}dt \label{introEquation:diffHamiltonian1}
152 > L}}{{\partial t}}dt . \label{introEquation:diffHamiltonian1}
153   \end{equation}
154 < Making use of  Eq.~\ref{introEquation:generalizedMomenta}, the
155 < second and fourth terms in the parentheses cancel. Therefore,
154 > Making use of Eq.~\ref{introEquation:generalizedMomenta}, the second
155 > and fourth terms in the parentheses cancel. Therefore,
156   Eq.~\ref{introEquation:diffHamiltonian1} can be rewritten as
157   \begin{equation}
158   dH = \sum\limits_k {\left( {\dot q_k dp_k  - \dot p_k dq_k }
159 < \right)}  - \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial t}}dt
159 > \right)}  - \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial t}}dt .
160   \label{introEquation:diffHamiltonian2}
161   \end{equation}
162   By identifying the coefficients of $dq_k$, $dp_k$ and dt, we can
163   find
164   \begin{equation}
165 < \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_k }} = q_k
165 > \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_k }} = \dot {q_k}
166   \label{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate}
167   \end{equation}
168   \begin{equation}
169 < \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial q_k }} =  - p_k
169 > \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial q_k }} =  - \dot {p_k}
170   \label{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum}
171   \end{equation}
172   and
# Line 183 | Line 175 | t}}
175   t}}
176   \label{introEquation:motionHamiltonianTime}
177   \end{equation}
178 <
187 < Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate} and
178 > where Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate} and
179   Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum} are Hamilton's
180   equation of motion. Due to their symmetrical formula, they are also
181 < known as the canonical equations of motions \cite{Goldstein01}.
181 > known as the canonical equations of motions \cite{Goldstein2001}.
182  
183   An important difference between Lagrangian approach and the
184   Hamiltonian approach is that the Lagrangian is considered to be a
185 < function of the generalized velocities $\dot q_i$ and the
186 < generalized coordinates $q_i$, while the Hamiltonian is considered
187 < to be a function of the generalized momenta $p_i$ and the conjugate
188 < generalized coordinate $q_i$. Hamiltonian Mechanics is more
189 < appropriate for application to statistical mechanics and quantum
190 < mechanics, since it treats the coordinate and its time derivative as
191 < independent variables and it only works with 1st-order differential
192 < equations\cite{Marion90}.
193 <
194 < When studying Hamiltonian system, it is more convenient to use
195 < notation
185 > function of the generalized velocities $\dot q_i$ and coordinates
186 > $q_i$, while the Hamiltonian is considered to be a function of the
187 > generalized momenta $p_i$ and the conjugate coordinates $q_i$.
188 > Hamiltonian Mechanics is more appropriate for application to
189 > statistical mechanics and quantum mechanics, since it treats the
190 > coordinate and its time derivative as independent variables and it
191 > only works with 1st-order differential equations\cite{Marion1990}.
192 > In Newtonian Mechanics, a system described by conservative forces
193 > conserves the total energy
194 > (Eq.~\ref{introEquation:energyConservation}). It follows that
195 > Hamilton's equations of motion conserve the total Hamiltonian
196   \begin{equation}
197 < r = r(q,p)^T
197 > \frac{{dH}}{{dt}} = \sum\limits_i {\left( {\frac{{\partial
198 > H}}{{\partial q_i }}\dot q_i  + \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_i
199 > }}\dot p_i } \right)}  = \sum\limits_i {\left( {\frac{{\partial
200 > H}}{{\partial q_i }}\frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_i }} -
201 > \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_i }}\frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial
202 > q_i }}} \right) = 0}. \label{introEquation:conserveHalmitonian}
203   \end{equation}
208 and to introduce a $2n \times 2n$ canonical structure matrix $J$,
209 \begin{equation}
210 J = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
211   0 & I  \\
212   { - I} & 0  \\
213 \end{array}} \right)
214 \label{introEquation:canonicalMatrix}
215 \end{equation}
216 where $I$ is a $n \times n$ identity matrix and $J$ is a
217 skew-symmetric matrix ($ J^T  =  - J $). Thus, Hamiltonian system
218 can be rewritten as,
219 \begin{equation}
220 \frac{d}{{dt}}r = J\nabla _r H(r)
221 \label{introEquation:compactHamiltonian}
222 \end{equation}
204  
224 %\subsection{\label{introSection:canonicalTransformation}Canonical
225 %Transformation}
226
227 \section{\label{introSection:geometricIntegratos}Geometric Integrators}
228
229 \subsection{\label{introSection:symplecticMaps}Symplectic Maps and Methods}
230
231 \subsection{\label{Construction of Symplectic Methods}}
232
205   \section{\label{introSection:statisticalMechanics}Statistical
206   Mechanics}
207  
208   The thermodynamic behaviors and properties of Molecular Dynamics
209   simulation are governed by the principle of Statistical Mechanics.
210   The following section will give a brief introduction to some of the
211 < Statistical Mechanics concepts presented in this dissertation.
211 > Statistical Mechanics concepts and theorem presented in this
212 > dissertation.
213  
214 < \subsection{\label{introSection::ensemble}Ensemble and Phase Space}
214 > \subsection{\label{introSection:ensemble}Phase Space and Ensemble}
215  
216 + Mathematically, phase space is the space which represents all
217 + possible states of a system. Each possible state of the system
218 + corresponds to one unique point in the phase space. For mechanical
219 + systems, the phase space usually consists of all possible values of
220 + position and momentum variables. Consider a dynamic system of $f$
221 + particles in a cartesian space, where each of the $6f$ coordinates
222 + and momenta is assigned to one of $6f$ mutually orthogonal axes, the
223 + phase space of this system is a $6f$ dimensional space. A point, $x
224 + =
225 + (\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
226 + \over q} _1 , \ldots
227 + ,\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
228 + \over q} _f
229 + ,\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
230 + \over p} _1  \ldots
231 + ,\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
232 + \over p} _f )$ , with a unique set of values of $6f$ coordinates and
233 + momenta is a phase space vector.
234 + %%%fix me
235 +
236 + In statistical mechanics, the condition of an ensemble at any time
237 + can be regarded as appropriately specified by the density $\rho$
238 + with which representative points are distributed over the phase
239 + space. The density distribution for an ensemble with $f$ degrees of
240 + freedom is defined as,
241 + \begin{equation}
242 + \rho  = \rho (q_1 , \ldots ,q_f ,p_1 , \ldots ,p_f ,t).
243 + \label{introEquation:densityDistribution}
244 + \end{equation}
245 + Governed by the principles of mechanics, the phase points change
246 + their locations which changes the density at any time at phase
247 + space. Hence, the density distribution is also to be taken as a
248 + function of the time. The number of systems $\delta N$ at time $t$
249 + can be determined by,
250 + \begin{equation}
251 + \delta N = \rho (q,p,t)dq_1  \ldots dq_f dp_1  \ldots dp_f.
252 + \label{introEquation:deltaN}
253 + \end{equation}
254 + Assuming enough copies of the systems, we can sufficiently
255 + approximate $\delta N$ without introducing discontinuity when we go
256 + from one region in the phase space to another. By integrating over
257 + the whole phase space,
258 + \begin{equation}
259 + N = \int { \ldots \int {\rho (q,p,t)dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ...dp_f
260 + \label{introEquation:totalNumberSystem}
261 + \end{equation}
262 + gives us an expression for the total number of copies. Hence, the
263 + probability per unit volume in the phase space can be obtained by,
264 + \begin{equation}
265 + \frac{{\rho (q,p,t)}}{N} = \frac{{\rho (q,p,t)}}{{\int { \ldots \int
266 + {\rho (q,p,t)dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ...dp_f }}.
267 + \label{introEquation:unitProbability}
268 + \end{equation}
269 + With the help of Eq.~\ref{introEquation:unitProbability} and the
270 + knowledge of the system, it is possible to calculate the average
271 + value of any desired quantity which depends on the coordinates and
272 + momenta of the system. Even when the dynamics of the real system are
273 + complex, or stochastic, or even discontinuous, the average
274 + properties of the ensemble of possibilities as a whole remain well
275 + defined. For a classical system in thermal equilibrium with its
276 + environment, the ensemble average of a mechanical quantity, $\langle
277 + A(q , p) \rangle_t$, takes the form of an integral over the phase
278 + space of the system,
279 + \begin{equation}
280 + \langle  A(q , p) \rangle_t = \frac{{\int { \ldots \int {A(q,p)\rho
281 + (q,p,t)dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ...dp_f }}{{\int { \ldots \int {\rho
282 + (q,p,t)dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ...dp_f }}.
283 + \label{introEquation:ensembelAverage}
284 + \end{equation}
285 +
286 + There are several different types of ensembles with different
287 + statistical characteristics. As a function of macroscopic
288 + parameters, such as temperature \textit{etc}, the partition function
289 + can be used to describe the statistical properties of a system in
290 + thermodynamic equilibrium. As an ensemble of systems, each of which
291 + is known to be thermally isolated and conserve energy, the
292 + Microcanonical ensemble (NVE) has a partition function like,
293 + \begin{equation}
294 + \Omega (N,V,E) = e^{\beta TS}. \label{introEquation:NVEPartition}
295 + \end{equation}
296 + A canonical ensemble (NVT) is an ensemble of systems, each of which
297 + can share its energy with a large heat reservoir. The distribution
298 + of the total energy amongst the possible dynamical states is given
299 + by the partition function,
300 + \begin{equation}
301 + \Omega (N,V,T) = e^{ - \beta A}.
302 + \label{introEquation:NVTPartition}
303 + \end{equation}
304 + Here, $A$ is the Helmholtz free energy which is defined as $ A = U -
305 + TS$. Since most experiments are carried out under constant pressure
306 + condition, the isothermal-isobaric ensemble (NPT) plays a very
307 + important role in molecular simulations. The isothermal-isobaric
308 + ensemble allow the system to exchange energy with a heat bath of
309 + temperature $T$ and to change the volume as well. Its partition
310 + function is given as
311 + \begin{equation}
312 + \Delta (N,P,T) =  - e^{\beta G}.
313 + \label{introEquation:NPTPartition}
314 + \end{equation}
315 + Here, $G = U - TS + PV$, and $G$ is called Gibbs free energy.
316 +
317 + \subsection{\label{introSection:liouville}Liouville's theorem}
318 +
319 + Liouville's theorem is the foundation on which statistical mechanics
320 + rests. It describes the time evolution of the phase space
321 + distribution function. In order to calculate the rate of change of
322 + $\rho$, we begin from Eq.~\ref{introEquation:deltaN}. If we consider
323 + the two faces perpendicular to the $q_1$ axis, which are located at
324 + $q_1$ and $q_1 + \delta q_1$, the number of phase points leaving the
325 + opposite face is given by the expression,
326 + \begin{equation}
327 + \left( {\rho  + \frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial q_1 }}\delta q_1 }
328 + \right)\left( {\dot q_1  + \frac{{\partial \dot q_1 }}{{\partial q_1
329 + }}\delta q_1 } \right)\delta q_2  \ldots \delta q_f \delta p_1
330 + \ldots \delta p_f .
331 + \end{equation}
332 + Summing all over the phase space, we obtain
333 + \begin{equation}
334 + \frac{{d(\delta N)}}{{dt}} =  - \sum\limits_{i = 1}^f {\left[ {\rho
335 + \left( {\frac{{\partial \dot q_i }}{{\partial q_i }} +
336 + \frac{{\partial \dot p_i }}{{\partial p_i }}} \right) + \left(
337 + {\frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial q_i }}\dot q_i  + \frac{{\partial
338 + \rho }}{{\partial p_i }}\dot p_i } \right)} \right]} \delta q_1
339 + \ldots \delta q_f \delta p_1  \ldots \delta p_f .
340 + \end{equation}
341 + Differentiating the equations of motion in Hamiltonian formalism
342 + (\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate},
343 + \ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum}), we can show,
344 + \begin{equation}
345 + \sum\limits_i {\left( {\frac{{\partial \dot q_i }}{{\partial q_i }}
346 + + \frac{{\partial \dot p_i }}{{\partial p_i }}} \right)}  = 0 ,
347 + \end{equation}
348 + which cancels the first terms of the right hand side. Furthermore,
349 + dividing $ \delta q_1  \ldots \delta q_f \delta p_1  \ldots \delta
350 + p_f $ in both sides, we can write out Liouville's theorem in a
351 + simple form,
352 + \begin{equation}
353 + \frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial t}} + \sum\limits_{i = 1}^f
354 + {\left( {\frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial q_i }}\dot q_i  +
355 + \frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial p_i }}\dot p_i } \right)}  = 0 .
356 + \label{introEquation:liouvilleTheorem}
357 + \end{equation}
358 + Liouville's theorem states that the distribution function is
359 + constant along any trajectory in phase space. In classical
360 + statistical mechanics, since the number of system copies in an
361 + ensemble is huge and constant, we can assume the local density has
362 + no reason (other than classical mechanics) to change,
363 + \begin{equation}
364 + \frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial t}} = 0.
365 + \label{introEquation:stationary}
366 + \end{equation}
367 + In such stationary system, the density of distribution $\rho$ can be
368 + connected to the Hamiltonian $H$ through Maxwell-Boltzmann
369 + distribution,
370 + \begin{equation}
371 + \rho  \propto e^{ - \beta H}
372 + \label{introEquation:densityAndHamiltonian}
373 + \end{equation}
374 +
375 + \subsubsection{\label{introSection:phaseSpaceConservation}\textbf{Conservation of Phase Space}}
376 + Lets consider a region in the phase space,
377 + \begin{equation}
378 + \delta v = \int { \ldots \int {dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ..dp_f .
379 + \end{equation}
380 + If this region is small enough, the density $\rho$ can be regarded
381 + as uniform over the whole integral. Thus, the number of phase points
382 + inside this region is given by,
383 + \begin{equation}
384 + \delta N = \rho \delta v = \rho \int { \ldots \int {dq_1 } ...dq_f
385 + dp_1 } ..dp_f.
386 + \end{equation}
387 +
388 + \begin{equation}
389 + \frac{{d(\delta N)}}{{dt}} = \frac{{d\rho }}{{dt}}\delta v + \rho
390 + \frac{d}{{dt}}(\delta v) = 0.
391 + \end{equation}
392 + With the help of the stationary assumption
393 + (Eq.~\ref{introEquation:stationary}), we obtain the principle of
394 + \emph{conservation of volume in phase space},
395 + \begin{equation}
396 + \frac{d}{{dt}}(\delta v) = \frac{d}{{dt}}\int { \ldots \int {dq_1 }
397 + ...dq_f dp_1 } ..dp_f  = 0.
398 + \label{introEquation:volumePreserving}
399 + \end{equation}
400 +
401 + \subsubsection{\label{introSection:liouvilleInOtherForms}\textbf{Liouville's Theorem in Other Forms}}
402 +
403 + Liouville's theorem can be expressed in a variety of different forms
404 + which are convenient within different contexts. For any two function
405 + $F$ and $G$ of the coordinates and momenta of a system, the Poisson
406 + bracket ${F, G}$ is defined as
407 + \begin{equation}
408 + \left\{ {F,G} \right\} = \sum\limits_i {\left( {\frac{{\partial
409 + F}}{{\partial q_i }}\frac{{\partial G}}{{\partial p_i }} -
410 + \frac{{\partial F}}{{\partial p_i }}\frac{{\partial G}}{{\partial
411 + q_i }}} \right)}.
412 + \label{introEquation:poissonBracket}
413 + \end{equation}
414 + Substituting equations of motion in Hamiltonian formalism
415 + (Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate} ,
416 + Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum}) into
417 + (Eq.~\ref{introEquation:liouvilleTheorem}), we can rewrite
418 + Liouville's theorem using Poisson bracket notion,
419 + \begin{equation}
420 + \left( {\frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial t}}} \right) =  - \left\{
421 + {\rho ,H} \right\}.
422 + \label{introEquation:liouvilleTheromInPoissin}
423 + \end{equation}
424 + Moreover, the Liouville operator is defined as
425 + \begin{equation}
426 + iL = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^f {\left( {\frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial
427 + p_i }}\frac{\partial }{{\partial q_i }} - \frac{{\partial
428 + H}}{{\partial q_i }}\frac{\partial }{{\partial p_i }}} \right)}
429 + \label{introEquation:liouvilleOperator}
430 + \end{equation}
431 + In terms of Liouville operator, Liouville's equation can also be
432 + expressed as
433 + \begin{equation}
434 + \left( {\frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial t}}} \right) =  - iL\rho
435 + \label{introEquation:liouvilleTheoremInOperator}
436 + \end{equation}
437 + which can help define a propagator $\rho (t) = e^{-iLt} \rho (0)$.
438   \subsection{\label{introSection:ergodic}The Ergodic Hypothesis}
439  
440   Various thermodynamic properties can be calculated from Molecular
441   Dynamics simulation. By comparing experimental values with the
442   calculated properties, one can determine the accuracy of the
443 < simulation and the quality of the underlying model. However, both of
444 < experiment and computer simulation are usually performed during a
443 > simulation and the quality of the underlying model. However, both
444 > experiments and computer simulations are usually performed during a
445   certain time interval and the measurements are averaged over a
446 < period of them which is different from the average behavior of
447 < many-body system in Statistical Mechanics. Fortunately, Ergodic
448 < Hypothesis is proposed to make a connection between time average and
449 < ensemble average. It states that time average and average over the
450 < statistical ensemble are identical \cite{Frenkel1996, leach01:mm}.
446 > period of time which is different from the average behavior of
447 > many-body system in Statistical Mechanics. Fortunately, the Ergodic
448 > Hypothesis makes a connection between time average and the ensemble
449 > average. It states that the time average and average over the
450 > statistical ensemble are identical \cite{Frenkel1996, Leach2001}:
451   \begin{equation}
452 < \langle A \rangle_t = \mathop {\lim }\limits_{t \to \infty }
453 < \frac{1}{t}\int\limits_0^t {A(p(t),q(t))dt = \int\limits_\Gamma
454 < {A(p(t),q(t))} } \rho (p(t), q(t)) dpdq
452 > \langle A(q , p) \rangle_t = \mathop {\lim }\limits_{t \to \infty }
453 > \frac{1}{t}\int\limits_0^t {A(q(t),p(t))dt = \int\limits_\Gamma
454 > {A(q(t),p(t))} } \rho (q(t), p(t)) dqdp
455   \end{equation}
456 < where $\langle A \rangle_t$ is an equilibrium value of a physical
457 < quantity and $\rho (p(t), q(t))$ is the equilibrium distribution
458 < function. If an observation is averaged over a sufficiently long
459 < time (longer than relaxation time), all accessible microstates in
460 < phase space are assumed to be equally probed, giving a properly
461 < weighted statistical average. This allows the researcher freedom of
462 < choice when deciding how best to measure a given observable. In case
463 < an ensemble averaged approach sounds most reasonable, the Monte
464 < Carlo techniques\cite{metropolis:1949} can be utilized. Or if the
465 < system lends itself to a time averaging approach, the Molecular
466 < Dynamics techniques in Sec.~\ref{introSection:molecularDynamics}
467 < will be the best choice.
456 > where $\langle  A(q , p) \rangle_t$ is an equilibrium value of a
457 > physical quantity and $\rho (p(t), q(t))$ is the equilibrium
458 > distribution function. If an observation is averaged over a
459 > sufficiently long time (longer than the relaxation time), all
460 > accessible microstates in phase space are assumed to be equally
461 > probed, giving a properly weighted statistical average. This allows
462 > the researcher freedom of choice when deciding how best to measure a
463 > given observable. In case an ensemble averaged approach sounds most
464 > reasonable, the Monte Carlo methods\cite{Metropolis1949} can be
465 > utilized. Or if the system lends itself to a time averaging
466 > approach, the Molecular Dynamics techniques in
467 > Sec.~\ref{introSection:molecularDynamics} will be the best
468 > choice\cite{Frenkel1996}.
469  
470 < \section{\label{introSection:molecularDynamics}Molecular Dynamics}
470 > \section{\label{introSection:geometricIntegratos}Geometric Integrators}
471 > A variety of numerical integrators have been proposed to simulate
472 > the motions of atoms in MD simulation. They usually begin with
473 > initial conditionals and move the objects in the direction governed
474 > by the differential equations. However, most of them ignore the
475 > hidden physical laws contained within the equations. Since 1990,
476 > geometric integrators, which preserve various phase-flow invariants
477 > such as symplectic structure, volume and time reversal symmetry,
478 > were developed to address this issue\cite{Dullweber1997,
479 > McLachlan1998, Leimkuhler1999}. The velocity Verlet method, which
480 > happens to be a simple example of symplectic integrator, continues
481 > to gain popularity in the molecular dynamics community. This fact
482 > can be partly explained by its geometric nature.
483  
484 < As a special discipline of molecular modeling, Molecular dynamics
485 < has proven to be a powerful tool for studying the functions of
486 < biological systems, providing structural, thermodynamic and
487 < dynamical information.
484 > \subsection{\label{introSection:symplecticManifold}Symplectic Manifolds}
485 > A \emph{manifold} is an abstract mathematical space. It looks
486 > locally like Euclidean space, but when viewed globally, it may have
487 > more complicated structure. A good example of manifold is the
488 > surface of Earth. It seems to be flat locally, but it is round if
489 > viewed as a whole. A \emph{differentiable manifold} (also known as
490 > \emph{smooth manifold}) is a manifold on which it is possible to
491 > apply calculus\cite{Hirsch1997}. A \emph{symplectic manifold} is
492 > defined as a pair $(M, \omega)$ which consists of a
493 > \emph{differentiable manifold} $M$ and a close, non-degenerated,
494 > bilinear symplectic form, $\omega$. A symplectic form on a vector
495 > space $V$ is a function $\omega(x, y)$ which satisfies
496 > $\omega(\lambda_1x_1+\lambda_2x_2, y) = \lambda_1\omega(x_1, y)+
497 > \lambda_2\omega(x_2, y)$, $\omega(x, y) = - \omega(y, x)$ and
498 > $\omega(x, x) = 0$\cite{McDuff1998}. The cross product operation in
499 > vector field is an example of symplectic form. One of the
500 > motivations to study \emph{symplectic manifolds} in Hamiltonian
501 > Mechanics is that a symplectic manifold can represent all possible
502 > configurations of the system and the phase space of the system can
503 > be described by it's cotangent bundle\cite{Jost2002}. Every
504 > symplectic manifold is even dimensional. For instance, in Hamilton
505 > equations, coordinate and momentum always appear in pairs.
506  
507 < \subsection{\label{introSec:mdInit}Initialization}
507 > \subsection{\label{introSection:ODE}Ordinary Differential Equations}
508  
509 < \subsection{\label{introSection:mdIntegration} Integration of the Equations of Motion}
509 > For an ordinary differential system defined as
510 > \begin{equation}
511 > \dot x = f(x)
512 > \end{equation}
513 > where $x = x(q,p)^T$, this system is a canonical Hamiltonian, if
514 > $f(x) = J\nabla _x H(x)$. Here, $H = H (q, p)$ is Hamiltonian
515 > function and $J$ is the skew-symmetric matrix
516 > \begin{equation}
517 > J = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
518 >   0 & I  \\
519 >   { - I} & 0  \\
520 > \end{array}} \right)
521 > \label{introEquation:canonicalMatrix}
522 > \end{equation}
523 > where $I$ is an identity matrix. Using this notation, Hamiltonian
524 > system can be rewritten as,
525 > \begin{equation}
526 > \frac{d}{{dt}}x = J\nabla _x H(x).
527 > \label{introEquation:compactHamiltonian}
528 > \end{equation}In this case, $f$ is
529 > called a \emph{Hamiltonian vector field}. Another generalization of
530 > Hamiltonian dynamics is Poisson Dynamics\cite{Olver1986},
531 > \begin{equation}
532 > \dot x = J(x)\nabla _x H \label{introEquation:poissonHamiltonian}
533 > \end{equation}
534 > The most obvious change being that matrix $J$ now depends on $x$.
535  
536 < \section{\label{introSection:rigidBody}Dynamics of Rigid Bodies}
536 > \subsection{\label{introSection:exactFlow}Exact Propagator}
537  
538 < A rigid body is a body in which the distance between any two given
539 < points of a rigid body remains constant regardless of external
540 < forces exerted on it. A rigid body therefore conserves its shape
541 < during its motion.
538 > Let $x(t)$ be the exact solution of the ODE
539 > system,$\frac{{dx}}{{dt}} = f(x) \label{introEquation:ODE}$, we can
540 > define its exact propagator(solution) $\varphi_\tau$
541 > \[ x(t+\tau)
542 > =\varphi_\tau(x(t))
543 > \]
544 > where $\tau$ is a fixed time step and $\varphi$ is a map from phase
545 > space to itself. The propagator has the continuous group property,
546 > \begin{equation}
547 > \varphi _{\tau _1 }  \circ \varphi _{\tau _2 }  = \varphi _{\tau _1
548 > + \tau _2 } .
549 > \end{equation}
550 > In particular,
551 > \begin{equation}
552 > \varphi _\tau   \circ \varphi _{ - \tau }  = I
553 > \end{equation}
554 > Therefore, the exact propagator is self-adjoint,
555 > \begin{equation}
556 > \varphi _\tau   = \varphi _{ - \tau }^{ - 1}.
557 > \end{equation}
558 > The exact propagator can also be written in terms of operator,
559 > \begin{equation}
560 > \varphi _\tau  (x) = e^{\tau \sum\limits_i {f_i (x)\frac{\partial
561 > }{{\partial x_i }}} } (x) \equiv \exp (\tau f)(x).
562 > \label{introEquation:exponentialOperator}
563 > \end{equation}
564 > In most cases, it is not easy to find the exact propagator
565 > $\varphi_\tau$. Instead, we use an approximate map, $\psi_\tau$,
566 > which is usually called an integrator. The order of an integrator
567 > $\psi_\tau$ is $p$, if the Taylor series of $\psi_\tau$ agree to
568 > order $p$,
569 > \begin{equation}
570 > \psi_\tau(x) = x + \tau f(x) + O(\tau^{p+1})
571 > \end{equation}
572  
573 < Applications of dynamics of rigid bodies.
573 > \subsection{\label{introSection:geometricProperties}Geometric Properties}
574  
575 < \subsection{\label{introSection:lieAlgebra}Lie Algebra}
575 > The hidden geometric properties\cite{Budd1999, Marsden1998} of an
576 > ODE and its propagator play important roles in numerical studies.
577 > Many of them can be found in systems which occur naturally in
578 > applications. Let $\varphi$ be the propagator of Hamiltonian vector
579 > field, $\varphi$ is a \emph{symplectic} propagator if it satisfies,
580 > \begin{equation}
581 > {\varphi '}^T J \varphi ' = J.
582 > \end{equation}
583 > According to Liouville's theorem, the symplectic volume is invariant
584 > under a Hamiltonian propagator, which is the basis for classical
585 > statistical mechanics. Furthermore, the propagator of a Hamiltonian
586 > vector field on a symplectic manifold can be shown to be a
587 > symplectomorphism. As to the Poisson system,
588 > \begin{equation}
589 > {\varphi '}^T J \varphi ' = J \circ \varphi
590 > \end{equation}
591 > is the property that must be preserved by the integrator. It is
592 > possible to construct a \emph{volume-preserving} propagator for a
593 > source free ODE ($ \nabla \cdot f = 0 $), if the propagator
594 > satisfies $ \det d\varphi  = 1$. One can show easily that a
595 > symplectic propagator will be volume-preserving. Changing the
596 > variables $y = h(x)$ in an ODE (Eq.~\ref{introEquation:ODE}) will
597 > result in a new system,
598 > \[
599 > \dot y = \tilde f(y) = ((dh \cdot f)h^{ - 1} )(y).
600 > \]
601 > The vector filed $f$ has reversing symmetry $h$ if $f = - \tilde f$.
602 > In other words, the propagator of this vector field is reversible if
603 > and only if $ h \circ \varphi ^{ - 1}  = \varphi  \circ h $. A
604 > conserved quantity of a general differential function is a function
605 > $ G:R^{2d}  \to R^d $ which is constant for all solutions of the ODE
606 > $\frac{{dx}}{{dt}} = f(x)$ ,
607 > \[
608 > \frac{{dG(x(t))}}{{dt}} = 0.
609 > \]
610 > Using the chain rule, one may obtain,
611 > \[
612 > \sum\limits_i {\frac{{dG}}{{dx_i }}} f_i (x) = f \dot \nabla G,
613 > \]
614 > which is the condition for conserved quantities. For a canonical
615 > Hamiltonian system, the time evolution of an arbitrary smooth
616 > function $G$ is given by,
617 > \begin{eqnarray}
618 > \frac{{dG(x(t))}}{{dt}} & = & [\nabla _x G(x(t))]^T \dot x(t) \notag\\
619 >                        & = & [\nabla _x G(x(t))]^T J\nabla _x H(x(t)).
620 > \label{introEquation:firstIntegral1}
621 > \end{eqnarray}
622 > Using poisson bracket notion, Eq.~\ref{introEquation:firstIntegral1}
623 > can be rewritten as
624 > \[
625 > \frac{d}{{dt}}G(x(t)) = \left\{ {G,H} \right\}(x(t)).
626 > \]
627 > Therefore, the sufficient condition for $G$ to be a conserved
628 > quantity of a Hamiltonian system is $\left\{ {G,H} \right\} = 0.$ As
629 > is well known, the Hamiltonian (or energy) H of a Hamiltonian system
630 > is a conserved quantity, which is due to the fact $\{ H,H\}  = 0$.
631 > When designing any numerical methods, one should always try to
632 > preserve the structural properties of the original ODE and its
633 > propagator.
634  
635 < \subsection{\label{introSection:DLMMotionEquation}The Euler Equations of Rigid Body Motion}
635 > \subsection{\label{introSection:constructionSymplectic}Construction of Symplectic Methods}
636 > A lot of well established and very effective numerical methods have
637 > been successful precisely because of their symplectic nature even
638 > though this fact was not recognized when they were first
639 > constructed. The most famous example is the Verlet-leapfrog method
640 > in molecular dynamics. In general, symplectic integrators can be
641 > constructed using one of four different methods.
642 > \begin{enumerate}
643 > \item Generating functions
644 > \item Variational methods
645 > \item Runge-Kutta methods
646 > \item Splitting methods
647 > \end{enumerate}
648 > Generating functions\cite{Channell1990} tend to lead to methods
649 > which are cumbersome and difficult to use. In dissipative systems,
650 > variational methods can capture the decay of energy
651 > accurately\cite{Kane2000}. Since they are geometrically unstable
652 > against non-Hamiltonian perturbations, ordinary implicit Runge-Kutta
653 > methods are not suitable for Hamiltonian system. Recently, various
654 > high-order explicit Runge-Kutta methods \cite{Owren1992,Chen2003}
655 > have been developed to overcome this instability. However, due to
656 > computational penalty involved in implementing the Runge-Kutta
657 > methods, they have not attracted much attention from the Molecular
658 > Dynamics community. Instead, splitting methods have been widely
659 > accepted since they exploit natural decompositions of the
660 > system\cite{Tuckerman1992, McLachlan1998}.
661  
662 < \subsection{\label{introSection:otherRBMotionEquation}Other Formulations for Rigid Body Motion}
662 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:splittingMethod}\textbf{Splitting Methods}}
663  
664 < %\subsection{\label{introSection:poissonBrackets}Poisson Brackets}
664 > The main idea behind splitting methods is to decompose the discrete
665 > $\varphi_h$ as a composition of simpler propagators,
666 > \begin{equation}
667 > \varphi _h  = \varphi _{h_1 }  \circ \varphi _{h_2 }  \ldots  \circ
668 > \varphi _{h_n }
669 > \label{introEquation:FlowDecomposition}
670 > \end{equation}
671 > where each of the sub-propagator is chosen such that each represent
672 > a simpler integration of the system. Suppose that a Hamiltonian
673 > system takes the form,
674 > \[
675 > H = H_1 + H_2.
676 > \]
677 > Here, $H_1$ and $H_2$ may represent different physical processes of
678 > the system. For instance, they may relate to kinetic and potential
679 > energy respectively, which is a natural decomposition of the
680 > problem. If $H_1$ and $H_2$ can be integrated using exact
681 > propagators $\varphi_1(t)$ and $\varphi_2(t)$, respectively, a
682 > simple first order expression is then given by the Lie-Trotter
683 > formula
684 > \begin{equation}
685 > \varphi _h  = \varphi _{1,h}  \circ \varphi _{2,h},
686 > \label{introEquation:firstOrderSplitting}
687 > \end{equation}
688 > where $\varphi _h$ is the result of applying the corresponding
689 > continuous $\varphi _i$ over a time $h$. By definition, as
690 > $\varphi_i(t)$ is the exact solution of a Hamiltonian system, it
691 > must follow that each operator $\varphi_i(t)$ is a symplectic map.
692 > It is easy to show that any composition of symplectic propagators
693 > yields a symplectic map,
694 > \begin{equation}
695 > (\varphi '\phi ')^T J\varphi '\phi ' = \phi '^T \varphi '^T J\varphi
696 > '\phi ' = \phi '^T J\phi ' = J,
697 > \label{introEquation:SymplecticFlowComposition}
698 > \end{equation}
699 > where $\phi$ and $\psi$ both are symplectic maps. Thus operator
700 > splitting in this context automatically generates a symplectic map.
701 > The Lie-Trotter
702 > splitting(Eq.~\ref{introEquation:firstOrderSplitting}) introduces
703 > local errors proportional to $h^2$, while the Strang splitting gives
704 > a second-order decomposition,
705 > \begin{equation}
706 > \varphi _h  = \varphi _{1,h/2}  \circ \varphi _{2,h}  \circ \varphi
707 > _{1,h/2} , \label{introEquation:secondOrderSplitting}
708 > \end{equation}
709 > which has a local error proportional to $h^3$. The Strang
710 > splitting's popularity in molecular simulation community attribute
711 > to its symmetric property,
712 > \begin{equation}
713 > \varphi _h^{ - 1} = \varphi _{ - h}.
714 > \label{introEquation:timeReversible}
715 > \end{equation}
716  
717 < \section{\label{introSection:correlationFunctions}Correlation Functions}
717 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:exampleSplittingMethod}\textbf{Examples of the Splitting Method}}
718 > The classical equation for a system consisting of interacting
719 > particles can be written in Hamiltonian form,
720 > \[
721 > H = T + V
722 > \]
723 > where $T$ is the kinetic energy and $V$ is the potential energy.
724 > Setting $H_1 = T, H_2 = V$ and applying the Strang splitting, one
725 > obtains the following:
726 > \begin{align}
727 > q(\Delta t) &= q(0) + \dot{q}(0)\Delta t +
728 >    \frac{F[q(0)]}{m}\frac{\Delta t^2}{2}, %
729 > \label{introEquation:Lp10a} \\%
730 > %
731 > \dot{q}(\Delta t) &= \dot{q}(0) + \frac{\Delta t}{2m}
732 >    \biggl [F[q(0)] + F[q(\Delta t)] \biggr]. %
733 > \label{introEquation:Lp10b}
734 > \end{align}
735 > where $F(t)$ is the force at time $t$. This integration scheme is
736 > known as \emph{velocity verlet} which is
737 > symplectic(\ref{introEquation:SymplecticFlowComposition}),
738 > time-reversible(\ref{introEquation:timeReversible}) and
739 > volume-preserving (\ref{introEquation:volumePreserving}). These
740 > geometric properties attribute to its long-time stability and its
741 > popularity in the community. However, the most commonly used
742 > velocity verlet integration scheme is written as below,
743 > \begin{align}
744 > \dot{q}\biggl (\frac{\Delta t}{2}\biggr ) &=
745 >    \dot{q}(0) + \frac{\Delta t}{2m}\, F[q(0)], \label{introEquation:Lp9a}\\%
746 > %
747 > q(\Delta t) &= q(0) + \Delta t\, \dot{q}\biggl (\frac{\Delta t}{2}\biggr ),%
748 >    \label{introEquation:Lp9b}\\%
749 > %
750 > \dot{q}(\Delta t) &= \dot{q}\biggl (\frac{\Delta t}{2}\biggr ) +
751 >    \frac{\Delta t}{2m}\, F[q(t)]. \label{introEquation:Lp9c}
752 > \end{align}
753 > From the preceding splitting, one can see that the integration of
754 > the equations of motion would follow:
755 > \begin{enumerate}
756 > \item calculate the velocities at the half step, $\frac{\Delta t}{2}$, from the forces calculated at the initial position.
757  
758 < \section{\label{introSection:langevinDynamics}Langevin Dynamics}
758 > \item Use the half step velocities to move positions one whole step, $\Delta t$.
759  
760 < \subsection{\label{introSection:generalizedLangevinDynamics}Generalized Langevin Dynamics}
760 > \item Evaluate the forces at the new positions, $\mathbf{q}(\Delta t)$, and use the new forces to complete the velocity move.
761  
762 < \subsection{\label{introSection:hydroynamics}Hydrodynamics}
762 > \item Repeat from step 1 with the new position, velocities, and forces assuming the roles of the initial values.
763 > \end{enumerate}
764 > By simply switching the order of the propagators in the splitting
765 > and composing a new integrator, the \emph{position verlet}
766 > integrator, can be generated,
767 > \begin{align}
768 > \dot q(\Delta t) &= \dot q(0) + \Delta tF(q(0))\left[ {q(0) +
769 > \frac{{\Delta t}}{{2m}}\dot q(0)} \right], %
770 > \label{introEquation:positionVerlet1} \\%
771 > %
772 > q(\Delta t) &= q(0) + \frac{{\Delta t}}{2}\left[ {\dot q(0) + \dot
773 > q(\Delta t)} \right]. %
774 > \label{introEquation:positionVerlet2}
775 > \end{align}
776 >
777 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:errorAnalysis}\textbf{Error Analysis and Higher Order Methods}}
778 >
779 > The Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula can be used to determine the
780 > local error of a splitting method in terms of the commutator of the
781 > operators(\ref{introEquation:exponentialOperator}) associated with
782 > the sub-propagator. For operators $hX$ and $hY$ which are associated
783 > with $\varphi_1(t)$ and $\varphi_2(t)$ respectively , we have
784 > \begin{equation}
785 > \exp (hX + hY) = \exp (hZ)
786 > \end{equation}
787 > where
788 > \begin{equation}
789 > hZ = hX + hY + \frac{{h^2 }}{2}[X,Y] + \frac{{h^3 }}{2}\left(
790 > {[X,[X,Y]] + [Y,[Y,X]]} \right) +  \ldots .
791 > \end{equation}
792 > Here, $[X,Y]$ is the commutator of operator $X$ and $Y$ given by
793 > \[
794 > [X,Y] = XY - YX .
795 > \]
796 > Applying the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula\cite{Varadarajan1974}
797 > to the Strang splitting, we can obtain
798 > \begin{eqnarray*}
799 > \exp (h X/2)\exp (h Y)\exp (h X/2) & = & \exp (h X + h Y + h^2 [X,Y]/4 + h^2 [Y,X]/4 \\
800 >                                   &   & \mbox{} + h^2 [X,X]/8 + h^2 [Y,Y]/8 \\
801 >                                   &   & \mbox{} + h^3 [Y,[Y,X]]/12 - h^3[X,[X,Y]]/24 + \ldots
802 >                                   ).
803 > \end{eqnarray*}
804 > Since $ [X,Y] + [Y,X] = 0$ and $ [X,X] = 0$, the dominant local
805 > error of Strang splitting is proportional to $h^3$. The same
806 > procedure can be applied to a general splitting of the form
807 > \begin{equation}
808 > \varphi _{b_m h}^2  \circ \varphi _{a_m h}^1  \circ \varphi _{b_{m -
809 > 1} h}^2  \circ  \ldots  \circ \varphi _{a_1 h}^1 .
810 > \end{equation}
811 > A careful choice of coefficient $a_1 \ldots b_m$ will lead to higher
812 > order methods. Yoshida proposed an elegant way to compose higher
813 > order methods based on symmetric splitting\cite{Yoshida1990}. Given
814 > a symmetric second order base method $ \varphi _h^{(2)} $, a
815 > fourth-order symmetric method can be constructed by composing,
816 > \[
817 > \varphi _h^{(4)}  = \varphi _{\alpha h}^{(2)}  \circ \varphi _{\beta
818 > h}^{(2)}  \circ \varphi _{\alpha h}^{(2)}
819 > \]
820 > where $ \alpha  =  - \frac{{2^{1/3} }}{{2 - 2^{1/3} }}$ and $ \beta
821 > = \frac{{2^{1/3} }}{{2 - 2^{1/3} }}$. Moreover, a symmetric
822 > integrator $ \varphi _h^{(2n + 2)}$ can be composed by
823 > \begin{equation}
824 > \varphi _h^{(2n + 2)}  = \varphi _{\alpha h}^{(2n)}  \circ \varphi
825 > _{\beta h}^{(2n)}  \circ \varphi _{\alpha h}^{(2n)},
826 > \end{equation}
827 > if the weights are chosen as
828 > \[
829 > \alpha  =  - \frac{{2^{1/(2n + 1)} }}{{2 - 2^{1/(2n + 1)} }},\beta =
830 > \frac{{2^{1/(2n + 1)} }}{{2 - 2^{1/(2n + 1)} }} .
831 > \]
832 >
833 > \section{\label{introSection:molecularDynamics}Molecular Dynamics}
834 >
835 > As one of the principal tools of molecular modeling, Molecular
836 > dynamics has proven to be a powerful tool for studying the functions
837 > of biological systems, providing structural, thermodynamic and
838 > dynamical information. The basic idea of molecular dynamics is that
839 > macroscopic properties are related to microscopic behavior and
840 > microscopic behavior can be calculated from the trajectories in
841 > simulations. For instance, instantaneous temperature of a
842 > Hamiltonian system of $N$ particles can be measured by
843 > \[
844 > T = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^N {\frac{{m_i v_i^2 }}{{fk_B }}}
845 > \]
846 > where $m_i$ and $v_i$ are the mass and velocity of $i$th particle
847 > respectively, $f$ is the number of degrees of freedom, and $k_B$ is
848 > the Boltzman constant.
849 >
850 > A typical molecular dynamics run consists of three essential steps:
851 > \begin{enumerate}
852 >  \item Initialization
853 >    \begin{enumerate}
854 >    \item Preliminary preparation
855 >    \item Minimization
856 >    \item Heating
857 >    \item Equilibration
858 >    \end{enumerate}
859 >  \item Production
860 >  \item Analysis
861 > \end{enumerate}
862 > These three individual steps will be covered in the following
863 > sections. Sec.~\ref{introSec:initialSystemSettings} deals with the
864 > initialization of a simulation. Sec.~\ref{introSection:production}
865 > will discuss issues of production runs.
866 > Sec.~\ref{introSection:Analysis} provides the theoretical tools for
867 > analysis of trajectories.
868 >
869 > \subsection{\label{introSec:initialSystemSettings}Initialization}
870 >
871 > \subsubsection{\textbf{Preliminary preparation}}
872 >
873 > When selecting the starting structure of a molecule for molecular
874 > simulation, one may retrieve its Cartesian coordinates from public
875 > databases, such as RCSB Protein Data Bank \textit{etc}. Although
876 > thousands of crystal structures of molecules are discovered every
877 > year, many more remain unknown due to the difficulties of
878 > purification and crystallization. Even for molecules with known
879 > structures, some important information is missing. For example, a
880 > missing hydrogen atom which acts as donor in hydrogen bonding must
881 > be added. Moreover, in order to include electrostatic interactions,
882 > one may need to specify the partial charges for individual atoms.
883 > Under some circumstances, we may even need to prepare the system in
884 > a special configuration. For instance, when studying transport
885 > phenomenon in membrane systems, we may prepare the lipids in a
886 > bilayer structure instead of placing lipids randomly in solvent,
887 > since we are not interested in the slow self-aggregation process.
888 >
889 > \subsubsection{\textbf{Minimization}}
890 >
891 > It is quite possible that some of molecules in the system from
892 > preliminary preparation may be overlapping with each other. This
893 > close proximity leads to high initial potential energy which
894 > consequently jeopardizes any molecular dynamics simulations. To
895 > remove these steric overlaps, one typically performs energy
896 > minimization to find a more reasonable conformation. Several energy
897 > minimization methods have been developed to exploit the energy
898 > surface and to locate the local minimum. While converging slowly
899 > near the minimum, steepest descent method is extremely robust when
900 > systems are strongly anharmonic. Thus, it is often used to refine
901 > structures from crystallographic data. Relying on the Hessian,
902 > advanced methods like Newton-Raphson converge rapidly to a local
903 > minimum, but become unstable if the energy surface is far from
904 > quadratic. Another factor that must be taken into account, when
905 > choosing energy minimization method, is the size of the system.
906 > Steepest descent and conjugate gradient can deal with models of any
907 > size. Because of the limits on computer memory to store the hessian
908 > matrix and the computing power needed to diagonalize these matrices,
909 > most Newton-Raphson methods can not be used with very large systems.
910 >
911 > \subsubsection{\textbf{Heating}}
912 >
913 > Typically, heating is performed by assigning random velocities
914 > according to a Maxwell-Boltzman distribution for a desired
915 > temperature. Beginning at a lower temperature and gradually
916 > increasing the temperature by assigning larger random velocities, we
917 > end up setting the temperature of the system to a final temperature
918 > at which the simulation will be conducted. In heating phase, we
919 > should also keep the system from drifting or rotating as a whole. To
920 > do this, the net linear momentum and angular momentum of the system
921 > is shifted to zero after each resampling from the Maxwell -Boltzman
922 > distribution.
923 >
924 > \subsubsection{\textbf{Equilibration}}
925 >
926 > The purpose of equilibration is to allow the system to evolve
927 > spontaneously for a period of time and reach equilibrium. The
928 > procedure is continued until various statistical properties, such as
929 > temperature, pressure, energy, volume and other structural
930 > properties \textit{etc}, become independent of time. Strictly
931 > speaking, minimization and heating are not necessary, provided the
932 > equilibration process is long enough. However, these steps can serve
933 > as a means to arrive at an equilibrated structure in an effective
934 > way.
935 >
936 > \subsection{\label{introSection:production}Production}
937 >
938 > The production run is the most important step of the simulation, in
939 > which the equilibrated structure is used as a starting point and the
940 > motions of the molecules are collected for later analysis. In order
941 > to capture the macroscopic properties of the system, the molecular
942 > dynamics simulation must be performed by sampling correctly and
943 > efficiently from the relevant thermodynamic ensemble.
944 >
945 > The most expensive part of a molecular dynamics simulation is the
946 > calculation of non-bonded forces, such as van der Waals force and
947 > Coulombic forces \textit{etc}. For a system of $N$ particles, the
948 > complexity of the algorithm for pair-wise interactions is $O(N^2 )$,
949 > which makes large simulations prohibitive in the absence of any
950 > algorithmic tricks. A natural approach to avoid system size issues
951 > is to represent the bulk behavior by a finite number of the
952 > particles. However, this approach will suffer from surface effects
953 > at the edges of the simulation. To offset this, \textit{Periodic
954 > boundary conditions} (see Fig.~\ref{introFig:pbc}) were developed to
955 > simulate bulk properties with a relatively small number of
956 > particles. In this method, the simulation box is replicated
957 > throughout space to form an infinite lattice. During the simulation,
958 > when a particle moves in the primary cell, its image in other cells
959 > move in exactly the same direction with exactly the same
960 > orientation. Thus, as a particle leaves the primary cell, one of its
961 > images will enter through the opposite face.
962 > \begin{figure}
963 > \centering
964 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{pbc.eps}
965 > \caption[An illustration of periodic boundary conditions]{A 2-D
966 > illustration of periodic boundary conditions. As one particle leaves
967 > the left of the simulation box, an image of it enters the right.}
968 > \label{introFig:pbc}
969 > \end{figure}
970 >
971 > %cutoff and minimum image convention
972 > Another important technique to improve the efficiency of force
973 > evaluation is to apply spherical cutoffs where particles farther
974 > than a predetermined distance are not included in the calculation
975 > \cite{Frenkel1996}. The use of a cutoff radius will cause a
976 > discontinuity in the potential energy curve. Fortunately, one can
977 > shift a simple radial potential to ensure the potential curve go
978 > smoothly to zero at the cutoff radius. The cutoff strategy works
979 > well for Lennard-Jones interaction because of its short range
980 > nature. However, simply truncating the electrostatic interaction
981 > with the use of cutoffs has been shown to lead to severe artifacts
982 > in simulations. The Ewald summation, in which the slowly decaying
983 > Coulomb potential is transformed into direct and reciprocal sums
984 > with rapid and absolute convergence, has proved to minimize the
985 > periodicity artifacts in liquid simulations. Taking the advantages
986 > of the fast Fourier transform (FFT) for calculating discrete Fourier
987 > transforms, the particle mesh-based
988 > methods\cite{Hockney1981,Shimada1993, Luty1994} are accelerated from
989 > $O(N^{3/2})$ to $O(N logN)$. An alternative approach is the
990 > \emph{fast multipole method}\cite{Greengard1987, Greengard1994},
991 > which treats Coulombic interactions exactly at short range, and
992 > approximate the potential at long range through multipolar
993 > expansion. In spite of their wide acceptance at the molecular
994 > simulation community, these two methods are difficult to implement
995 > correctly and efficiently. Instead, we use a damped and
996 > charge-neutralized Coulomb potential method developed by Wolf and
997 > his coworkers\cite{Wolf1999}. The shifted Coulomb potential for
998 > particle $i$ and particle $j$ at distance $r_{rj}$ is given by:
999 > \begin{equation}
1000 > V(r_{ij})= \frac{q_i q_j \textrm{erfc}(\alpha
1001 > r_{ij})}{r_{ij}}-\lim_{r_{ij}\rightarrow
1002 > R_\textrm{c}}\left\{\frac{q_iq_j \textrm{erfc}(\alpha
1003 > r_{ij})}{r_{ij}}\right\}. \label{introEquation:shiftedCoulomb}
1004 > \end{equation}
1005 > where $\alpha$ is the convergence parameter. Due to the lack of
1006 > inherent periodicity and rapid convergence,this method is extremely
1007 > efficient and easy to implement.
1008 > \begin{figure}
1009 > \centering
1010 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{shifted_coulomb.eps}
1011 > \caption[An illustration of shifted Coulomb potential]{An
1012 > illustration of shifted Coulomb potential.}
1013 > \label{introFigure:shiftedCoulomb}
1014 > \end{figure}
1015 >
1016 > %multiple time step
1017 >
1018 > \subsection{\label{introSection:Analysis} Analysis}
1019 >
1020 > Recently, advanced visualization technique have become applied to
1021 > monitor the motions of molecules. Although the dynamics of the
1022 > system can be described qualitatively from animation, quantitative
1023 > trajectory analysis is more useful. According to the principles of
1024 > Statistical Mechanics in
1025 > Sec.~\ref{introSection:statisticalMechanics}, one can compute
1026 > thermodynamic properties, analyze fluctuations of structural
1027 > parameters, and investigate time-dependent processes of the molecule
1028 > from the trajectories.
1029 >
1030 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:thermodynamicsProperties}\textbf{Thermodynamic Properties}}
1031 >
1032 > Thermodynamic properties, which can be expressed in terms of some
1033 > function of the coordinates and momenta of all particles in the
1034 > system, can be directly computed from molecular dynamics. The usual
1035 > way to measure the pressure is based on virial theorem of Clausius
1036 > which states that the virial is equal to $-3Nk_BT$. For a system
1037 > with forces between particles, the total virial, $W$, contains the
1038 > contribution from external pressure and interaction between the
1039 > particles:
1040 > \[
1041 > W =  - 3PV + \left\langle {\sum\limits_{i < j} {r{}_{ij} \cdot
1042 > f_{ij} } } \right\rangle
1043 > \]
1044 > where $f_{ij}$ is the force between particle $i$ and $j$ at a
1045 > distance $r_{ij}$. Thus, the expression for the pressure is given
1046 > by:
1047 > \begin{equation}
1048 > P = \frac{{Nk_B T}}{V} - \frac{1}{{3V}}\left\langle {\sum\limits_{i
1049 > < j} {r{}_{ij} \cdot f_{ij} } } \right\rangle
1050 > \end{equation}
1051 >
1052 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:structuralProperties}\textbf{Structural Properties}}
1053 >
1054 > Structural Properties of a simple fluid can be described by a set of
1055 > distribution functions. Among these functions,the \emph{pair
1056 > distribution function}, also known as \emph{radial distribution
1057 > function}, is of most fundamental importance to liquid theory.
1058 > Experimentally, pair distribution functions can be gathered by
1059 > Fourier transforming raw data from a series of neutron diffraction
1060 > experiments and integrating over the surface factor
1061 > \cite{Powles1973}. The experimental results can serve as a criterion
1062 > to justify the correctness of a liquid model. Moreover, various
1063 > equilibrium thermodynamic and structural properties can also be
1064 > expressed in terms of the radial distribution function
1065 > \cite{Allen1987}. The pair distribution functions $g(r)$ gives the
1066 > probability that a particle $i$ will be located at a distance $r$
1067 > from a another particle $j$ in the system
1068 > \begin{equation}
1069 > g(r) = \frac{V}{{N^2 }}\left\langle {\sum\limits_i {\sum\limits_{j
1070 > \ne i} {\delta (r - r_{ij} )} } } \right\rangle = \frac{\rho
1071 > (r)}{\rho}.
1072 > \end{equation}
1073 > Note that the delta function can be replaced by a histogram in
1074 > computer simulation. Peaks in $g(r)$ represent solvent shells, and
1075 > the height of these peaks gradually decreases to 1 as the liquid of
1076 > large distance approaches the bulk density.
1077 >
1078 >
1079 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:timeDependentProperties}\textbf{Time-dependent
1080 > Properties}}
1081 >
1082 > Time-dependent properties are usually calculated using \emph{time
1083 > correlation functions}, which correlate random variables $A$ and $B$
1084 > at two different times,
1085 > \begin{equation}
1086 > C_{AB} (t) = \left\langle {A(t)B(0)} \right\rangle.
1087 > \label{introEquation:timeCorrelationFunction}
1088 > \end{equation}
1089 > If $A$ and $B$ refer to same variable, this kind of correlation
1090 > function is called an \emph{autocorrelation function}. One example
1091 > of an auto correlation function is the velocity auto-correlation
1092 > function which is directly related to transport properties of
1093 > molecular liquids:
1094 > \[
1095 > D = \frac{1}{3}\int\limits_0^\infty  {\left\langle {v(t) \cdot v(0)}
1096 > \right\rangle } dt
1097 > \]
1098 > where $D$ is diffusion constant. Unlike the velocity autocorrelation
1099 > function, which is averaged over time origins and over all the
1100 > atoms, the dipole autocorrelation functions is calculated for the
1101 > entire system. The dipole autocorrelation function is given by:
1102 > \[
1103 > c_{dipole}  = \left\langle {u_{tot} (t) \cdot u_{tot} (t)}
1104 > \right\rangle
1105 > \]
1106 > Here $u_{tot}$ is the net dipole of the entire system and is given
1107 > by
1108 > \[
1109 > u_{tot} (t) = \sum\limits_i {u_i (t)}.
1110 > \]
1111 > In principle, many time correlation functions can be related to
1112 > Fourier transforms of the infrared, Raman, and inelastic neutron
1113 > scattering spectra of molecular liquids. In practice, one can
1114 > extract the IR spectrum from the intensity of the molecular dipole
1115 > fluctuation at each frequency using the following relationship:
1116 > \[
1117 > \hat c_{dipole} (v) = \int_{ - \infty }^\infty  {c_{dipole} (t)e^{ -
1118 > i2\pi vt} dt}.
1119 > \]
1120 >
1121 > \section{\label{introSection:rigidBody}Dynamics of Rigid Bodies}
1122 >
1123 > Rigid bodies are frequently involved in the modeling of different
1124 > areas, from engineering, physics, to chemistry. For example,
1125 > missiles and vehicles are usually modeled by rigid bodies.  The
1126 > movement of the objects in 3D gaming engines or other physics
1127 > simulators is governed by rigid body dynamics. In molecular
1128 > simulations, rigid bodies are used to simplify protein-protein
1129 > docking studies\cite{Gray2003}.
1130 >
1131 > It is very important to develop stable and efficient methods to
1132 > integrate the equations of motion for orientational degrees of
1133 > freedom. Euler angles are the natural choice to describe the
1134 > rotational degrees of freedom. However, due to $\frac {1}{sin
1135 > \theta}$ singularities, the numerical integration of corresponding
1136 > equations of these motion is very inefficient and inaccurate.
1137 > Although an alternative integrator using multiple sets of Euler
1138 > angles can overcome this difficulty\cite{Barojas1973}, the
1139 > computational penalty and the loss of angular momentum conservation
1140 > still remain. A singularity-free representation utilizing
1141 > quaternions was developed by Evans in 1977\cite{Evans1977}.
1142 > Unfortunately, this approach uses a nonseparable Hamiltonian
1143 > resulting from the quaternion representation, which prevents the
1144 > symplectic algorithm from being utilized. Another different approach
1145 > is to apply holonomic constraints to the atoms belonging to the
1146 > rigid body. Each atom moves independently under the normal forces
1147 > deriving from potential energy and constraint forces which are used
1148 > to guarantee the rigidness. However, due to their iterative nature,
1149 > the SHAKE and Rattle algorithms also converge very slowly when the
1150 > number of constraints increases\cite{Ryckaert1977, Andersen1983}.
1151 >
1152 > A break-through in geometric literature suggests that, in order to
1153 > develop a long-term integration scheme, one should preserve the
1154 > symplectic structure of the propagator. By introducing a conjugate
1155 > momentum to the rotation matrix $Q$ and re-formulating Hamiltonian's
1156 > equation, a symplectic integrator, RSHAKE\cite{Kol1997}, was
1157 > proposed to evolve the Hamiltonian system in a constraint manifold
1158 > by iteratively satisfying the orthogonality constraint $Q^T Q = 1$.
1159 > An alternative method using the quaternion representation was
1160 > developed by Omelyan\cite{Omelyan1998}. However, both of these
1161 > methods are iterative and inefficient. In this section, we descibe a
1162 > symplectic Lie-Poisson integrator for rigid bodies developed by
1163 > Dullweber and his coworkers\cite{Dullweber1997} in depth.
1164 >
1165 > \subsection{\label{introSection:constrainedHamiltonianRB}Constrained Hamiltonian for Rigid Bodies}
1166 > The motion of a rigid body is Hamiltonian with the Hamiltonian
1167 > function
1168 > \begin{equation}
1169 > H = \frac{1}{2}(p^T m^{ - 1} p) + \frac{1}{2}tr(PJ^{ - 1} P) +
1170 > V(q,Q) + \frac{1}{2}tr[(QQ^T  - 1)\Lambda ].
1171 > \label{introEquation:RBHamiltonian}
1172 > \end{equation}
1173 > Here, $q$ and $Q$  are the position and rotation matrix for the
1174 > rigid-body, $p$ and $P$  are conjugate momenta to $q$  and $Q$ , and
1175 > $J$, a diagonal matrix, is defined by
1176 > \[
1177 > I_{ii}^{ - 1}  = \frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_{i \ne j} {J_{jj}^{ - 1} }
1178 > \]
1179 > where $I_{ii}$ is the diagonal element of the inertia tensor. This
1180 > constrained Hamiltonian equation is subjected to a holonomic
1181 > constraint,
1182 > \begin{equation}
1183 > Q^T Q = 1, \label{introEquation:orthogonalConstraint}
1184 > \end{equation}
1185 > which is used to ensure rotation matrix's unitarity. Differentiating
1186 > Eq.~\ref{introEquation:orthogonalConstraint} and using
1187 > Eq.~\ref{introEquation:RBMotionMomentum}, one may obtain,
1188 > \begin{equation}
1189 > Q^T PJ^{ - 1}  + J^{ - 1} P^T Q = 0 . \\
1190 > \label{introEquation:RBFirstOrderConstraint}
1191 > \end{equation}
1192 > Using Equation (\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate},
1193 > \ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum}), one can write down
1194 > the equations of motion,
1195 > \begin{eqnarray}
1196 > \frac{{dq}}{{dt}} & = & \frac{p}{m}, \label{introEquation:RBMotionPosition}\\
1197 > \frac{{dp}}{{dt}} & = & - \nabla _q V(q,Q), \label{introEquation:RBMotionMomentum}\\
1198 > \frac{{dQ}}{{dt}} & = & PJ^{ - 1},  \label{introEquation:RBMotionRotation}\\
1199 > \frac{{dP}}{{dt}} & = & - \nabla _Q V(q,Q) - 2Q\Lambda . \label{introEquation:RBMotionP}
1200 > \end{eqnarray}
1201 > In general, there are two ways to satisfy the holonomic constraints.
1202 > We can use a constraint force provided by a Lagrange multiplier on
1203 > the normal manifold to keep the motion on constraint space. Or we
1204 > can simply evolve the system on the constraint manifold. These two
1205 > methods have been proved to be equivalent. The holonomic constraint
1206 > and equations of motions define a constraint manifold for rigid
1207 > bodies
1208 > \[
1209 > M = \left\{ {(Q,P):Q^T Q = 1,Q^T PJ^{ - 1}  + J^{ - 1} P^T Q = 0}
1210 > \right\}.
1211 > \]
1212 > Unfortunately, this constraint manifold is not the cotangent bundle
1213 > $T^* SO(3)$ which can be consider as a symplectic manifold on Lie
1214 > rotation group $SO(3)$. However, it turns out that under symplectic
1215 > transformation, the cotangent space and the phase space are
1216 > diffeomorphic. By introducing
1217 > \[
1218 > \tilde Q = Q,\tilde P = \frac{1}{2}\left( {P - QP^T Q} \right),
1219 > \]
1220 > the mechanical system subject to a holonomic constraint manifold $M$
1221 > can be re-formulated as a Hamiltonian system on the cotangent space
1222 > \[
1223 > T^* SO(3) = \left\{ {(\tilde Q,\tilde P):\tilde Q^T \tilde Q =
1224 > 1,\tilde Q^T \tilde PJ^{ - 1}  + J^{ - 1} P^T \tilde Q = 0} \right\}
1225 > \]
1226 > For a body fixed vector $X_i$ with respect to the center of mass of
1227 > the rigid body, its corresponding lab fixed vector $X_0^{lab}$  is
1228 > given as
1229 > \begin{equation}
1230 > X_i^{lab} = Q X_i + q.
1231 > \end{equation}
1232 > Therefore, potential energy $V(q,Q)$ is defined by
1233 > \[
1234 > V(q,Q) = V(Q X_0 + q).
1235 > \]
1236 > Hence, the force and torque are given by
1237 > \[
1238 > \nabla _q V(q,Q) = F(q,Q) = \sum\limits_i {F_i (q,Q)},
1239 > \]
1240 > and
1241 > \[
1242 > \nabla _Q V(q,Q) = F(q,Q)X_i^t
1243 > \]
1244 > respectively. As a common choice to describe the rotation dynamics
1245 > of the rigid body, the angular momentum on the body fixed frame $\Pi
1246 > = Q^t P$ is introduced to rewrite the equations of motion,
1247 > \begin{equation}
1248 > \begin{array}{l}
1249 > \dot \Pi  = J^{ - 1} \Pi ^T \Pi  + Q^T \sum\limits_i {F_i (q,Q)X_i^T }  - \Lambda,  \\
1250 > \dot Q  = Q\Pi {\rm{ }}J^{ - 1},  \\
1251 > \end{array}
1252 > \label{introEqaution:RBMotionPI}
1253 > \end{equation}
1254 > as well as holonomic constraints $\Pi J^{ - 1}  + J^{ - 1} \Pi ^t  =
1255 > 0$ and $Q^T Q = 1$. For a vector $v(v_1 ,v_2 ,v_3 ) \in R^3$ and a
1256 > matrix $\hat v \in so(3)^ \star$, the hat-map isomorphism,
1257 > \begin{equation}
1258 > v(v_1 ,v_2 ,v_3 ) \Leftrightarrow \hat v = \left(
1259 > {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
1260 >   0 & { - v_3 } & {v_2 }  \\
1261 >   {v_3 } & 0 & { - v_1 }  \\
1262 >   { - v_2 } & {v_1 } & 0  \\
1263 > \end{array}} \right),
1264 > \label{introEquation:hatmapIsomorphism}
1265 > \end{equation}
1266 > will let us associate the matrix products with traditional vector
1267 > operations
1268 > \[
1269 > \hat vu = v \times u.
1270 > \]
1271 > Using Eq.~\ref{introEqaution:RBMotionPI}, one can construct a skew
1272 > matrix,
1273 > \begin{eqnarray}
1274 > (\dot \Pi  - \dot \Pi ^T )&= &(\Pi  - \Pi ^T )(J^{ - 1} \Pi  + \Pi J^{ - 1} ) \notag \\
1275 > & & + \sum\limits_i {[Q^T F_i (r,Q)X_i^T  - X_i F_i (r,Q)^T Q]}  -
1276 > (\Lambda  - \Lambda ^T ). \label{introEquation:skewMatrixPI}
1277 > \end{eqnarray}
1278 > Since $\Lambda$ is symmetric, the last term of
1279 > Eq.~\ref{introEquation:skewMatrixPI} is zero, which implies the
1280 > Lagrange multiplier $\Lambda$ is absent from the equations of
1281 > motion. This unique property eliminates the requirement of
1282 > iterations which can not be avoided in other methods\cite{Kol1997,
1283 > Omelyan1998}. Applying the hat-map isomorphism, we obtain the
1284 > equation of motion for angular momentum on body frame
1285 > \begin{equation}
1286 > \dot \pi  = \pi  \times I^{ - 1} \pi  + \sum\limits_i {\left( {Q^T
1287 > F_i (r,Q)} \right) \times X_i }.
1288 > \label{introEquation:bodyAngularMotion}
1289 > \end{equation}
1290 > In the same manner, the equation of motion for rotation matrix is
1291 > given by
1292 > \[
1293 > \dot Q = Qskew(I^{ - 1} \pi ).
1294 > \]
1295 >
1296 > \subsection{\label{introSection:SymplecticFreeRB}Symplectic
1297 > Lie-Poisson Integrator for Free Rigid Body}
1298 >
1299 > If there are no external forces exerted on the rigid body, the only
1300 > contribution to the rotational motion is from the kinetic energy
1301 > (the first term of \ref{introEquation:bodyAngularMotion}). The free
1302 > rigid body is an example of a Lie-Poisson system with Hamiltonian
1303 > function
1304 > \begin{equation}
1305 > T^r (\pi ) = T_1 ^r (\pi _1 ) + T_2^r (\pi _2 ) + T_3^r (\pi _3 )
1306 > \label{introEquation:rotationalKineticRB}
1307 > \end{equation}
1308 > where $T_i^r (\pi _i ) = \frac{{\pi _i ^2 }}{{2I_i }}$ and
1309 > Lie-Poisson structure matrix,
1310 > \begin{equation}
1311 > J(\pi ) = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
1312 >   0 & {\pi _3 } & { - \pi _2 }  \\
1313 >   { - \pi _3 } & 0 & {\pi _1 }  \\
1314 >   {\pi _2 } & { - \pi _1 } & 0  \\
1315 > \end{array}} \right).
1316 > \end{equation}
1317 > Thus, the dynamics of free rigid body is governed by
1318 > \begin{equation}
1319 > \frac{d}{{dt}}\pi  = J(\pi )\nabla _\pi  T^r (\pi ).
1320 > \end{equation}
1321 > One may notice that each $T_i^r$ in
1322 > Eq.~\ref{introEquation:rotationalKineticRB} can be solved exactly.
1323 > For instance, the equations of motion due to $T_1^r$ are given by
1324 > \begin{equation}
1325 > \frac{d}{{dt}}\pi  = R_1 \pi ,\frac{d}{{dt}}Q = QR_1
1326 > \label{introEqaution:RBMotionSingleTerm}
1327 > \end{equation}
1328 > with
1329 > \[ R_1  = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
1330 >   0 & 0 & 0  \\
1331 >   0 & 0 & {\pi _1 }  \\
1332 >   0 & { - \pi _1 } & 0  \\
1333 > \end{array}} \right).
1334 > \]
1335 > The solutions of Eq.~\ref{introEqaution:RBMotionSingleTerm} is
1336 > \[
1337 > \pi (\Delta t) = e^{\Delta tR_1 } \pi (0),Q(\Delta t) =
1338 > Q(0)e^{\Delta tR_1 }
1339 > \]
1340 > with
1341 > \[
1342 > e^{\Delta tR_1 }  = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
1343 >   0 & 0 & 0  \\
1344 >   0 & {\cos \theta _1 } & {\sin \theta _1 }  \\
1345 >   0 & { - \sin \theta _1 } & {\cos \theta _1 }  \\
1346 > \end{array}} \right),\theta _1  = \frac{{\pi _1 }}{{I_1 }}\Delta t.
1347 > \]
1348 > To reduce the cost of computing expensive functions in $e^{\Delta
1349 > tR_1 }$, we can use Cayley transformation to obtain a single-aixs
1350 > propagator,
1351 > \[
1352 > e^{\Delta tR_1 }  \approx (1 - \Delta tR_1 )^{ - 1} (1 + \Delta tR_1
1353 > ).
1354 > \]
1355 > The propagator maps for $T_2^r$ and $T_3^r$ can be found in the same
1356 > manner. In order to construct a second-order symplectic method, we
1357 > split the angular kinetic Hamiltonian function into five terms
1358 > \[
1359 > T^r (\pi ) = \frac{1}{2}T_1 ^r (\pi _1 ) + \frac{1}{2}T_2^r (\pi _2
1360 > ) + T_3^r (\pi _3 ) + \frac{1}{2}T_2^r (\pi _2 ) + \frac{1}{2}T_1 ^r
1361 > (\pi _1 ).
1362 > \]
1363 > By concatenating the propagators corresponding to these five terms,
1364 > we can obtain an symplectic integrator,
1365 > \[
1366 > \varphi _{\Delta t,T^r }  = \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _1 }  \circ
1367 > \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _2 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t,\pi _3 }
1368 > \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _2 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi
1369 > _1 }.
1370 > \]
1371 > The non-canonical Lie-Poisson bracket ${F, G}$ of two function
1372 > $F(\pi )$ and $G(\pi )$ is defined by
1373 > \[
1374 > \{ F,G\} (\pi ) = [\nabla _\pi  F(\pi )]^T J(\pi )\nabla _\pi  G(\pi
1375 > ).
1376 > \]
1377 > If the Poisson bracket of a function $F$ with an arbitrary smooth
1378 > function $G$ is zero, $F$ is a \emph{Casimir}, which is the
1379 > conserved quantity in Poisson system. We can easily verify that the
1380 > norm of the angular momentum, $\parallel \pi
1381 > \parallel$, is a \emph{Casimir}. Let$ F(\pi ) = S(\frac{{\parallel
1382 > \pi \parallel ^2 }}{2})$ for an arbitrary function $ S:R \to R$ ,
1383 > then by the chain rule
1384 > \[
1385 > \nabla _\pi  F(\pi ) = S'(\frac{{\parallel \pi \parallel ^2
1386 > }}{2})\pi.
1387 > \]
1388 > Thus, $ [\nabla _\pi  F(\pi )]^T J(\pi ) =  - S'(\frac{{\parallel
1389 > \pi
1390 > \parallel ^2 }}{2})\pi  \times \pi  = 0 $. This explicit
1391 > Lie-Poisson integrator is found to be both extremely efficient and
1392 > stable. These properties can be explained by the fact the small
1393 > angle approximation is used and the norm of the angular momentum is
1394 > conserved.
1395 >
1396 > \subsection{\label{introSection:RBHamiltonianSplitting} Hamiltonian
1397 > Splitting for Rigid Body}
1398 >
1399 > The Hamiltonian of rigid body can be separated in terms of kinetic
1400 > energy and potential energy,$H = T(p,\pi ) + V(q,Q)$. The equations
1401 > of motion corresponding to potential energy and kinetic energy are
1402 > listed in the below table,
1403 > \begin{table}
1404 > \caption{EQUATIONS OF MOTION DUE TO POTENTIAL AND KINETIC ENERGIES}
1405 > \begin{center}
1406 > \begin{tabular}{|l|l|}
1407 >  \hline
1408 >  % after \\: \hline or \cline{col1-col2} \cline{col3-col4} ...
1409 >  Potential & Kinetic \\
1410 >  $\frac{{dq}}{{dt}} = \frac{p}{m}$ & $\frac{d}{{dt}}q = p$ \\
1411 >  $\frac{d}{{dt}}p =  - \frac{{\partial V}}{{\partial q}}$ & $ \frac{d}{{dt}}p = 0$ \\
1412 >  $\frac{d}{{dt}}Q = 0$ & $ \frac{d}{{dt}}Q = Qskew(I^{ - 1} j)$ \\
1413 >  $ \frac{d}{{dt}}\pi  = \sum\limits_i {\left( {Q^T F_i (r,Q)} \right) \times X_i }$ & $\frac{d}{{dt}}\pi  = \pi  \times I^{ - 1} \pi$\\
1414 >  \hline
1415 > \end{tabular}
1416 > \end{center}
1417 > \end{table}
1418 > A second-order symplectic method is now obtained by the composition
1419 > of the position and velocity propagators,
1420 > \[
1421 > \varphi _{\Delta t}  = \varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}  \circ \varphi
1422 > _{\Delta t,T}  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}.
1423 > \]
1424 > Moreover, $\varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}$ can be divided into two
1425 > sub-propagators which corresponding to force and torque
1426 > respectively,
1427 > \[
1428 > \varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}  = \varphi _{\Delta t/2,F}  \circ \varphi
1429 > _{\Delta t/2,\tau }.
1430 > \]
1431 > Since the associated operators of $\varphi _{\Delta t/2,F} $ and
1432 > $\circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\tau }$ commute, the composition order
1433 > inside $\varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}$ does not matter. Furthermore, the
1434 > kinetic energy can be separated to translational kinetic term, $T^t
1435 > (p)$, and rotational kinetic term, $T^r (\pi )$,
1436 > \begin{equation}
1437 > T(p,\pi ) =T^t (p) + T^r (\pi ).
1438 > \end{equation}
1439 > where $ T^t (p) = \frac{1}{2}p^T m^{ - 1} p $ and $T^r (\pi )$ is
1440 > defined by Eq.~\ref{introEquation:rotationalKineticRB}. Therefore,
1441 > the corresponding propagators are given by
1442 > \[
1443 > \varphi _{\Delta t,T}  = \varphi _{\Delta t,T^t }  \circ \varphi
1444 > _{\Delta t,T^r }.
1445 > \]
1446 > Finally, we obtain the overall symplectic propagators for freely
1447 > moving rigid bodies
1448 > \begin{eqnarray}
1449 > \varphi _{\Delta t}  &=& \varphi _{\Delta t/2,F}  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\tau }  \notag\\
1450 >  & & \circ \varphi _{\Delta t,T^t }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _1 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _2 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t,\pi _3 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _2 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _1 }  \notag\\
1451 >  & & \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\tau }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,F}  .\\
1452 > \label{introEquation:overallRBFlowMaps}
1453 > \end{eqnarray}
1454 >
1455 > \section{\label{introSection:langevinDynamics}Langevin Dynamics}
1456 > As an alternative to newtonian dynamics, Langevin dynamics, which
1457 > mimics a simple heat bath with stochastic and dissipative forces,
1458 > has been applied in a variety of studies. This section will review
1459 > the theory of Langevin dynamics. A brief derivation of generalized
1460 > Langevin equation will be given first. Following that, we will
1461 > discuss the physical meaning of the terms appearing in the equation
1462 > as well as the calculation of friction tensor from hydrodynamics
1463 > theory.
1464 >
1465 > \subsection{\label{introSection:generalizedLangevinDynamics}Derivation of Generalized Langevin Equation}
1466 >
1467 > A harmonic bath model, in which an effective set of harmonic
1468 > oscillators are used to mimic the effect of a linearly responding
1469 > environment, has been widely used in quantum chemistry and
1470 > statistical mechanics. One of the successful applications of
1471 > Harmonic bath model is the derivation of the Generalized Langevin
1472 > Dynamics (GLE). Lets consider a system, in which the degree of
1473 > freedom $x$ is assumed to couple to the bath linearly, giving a
1474 > Hamiltonian of the form
1475 > \begin{equation}
1476 > H = \frac{{p^2 }}{{2m}} + U(x) + H_B  + \Delta U(x,x_1 , \ldots x_N)
1477 > \label{introEquation:bathGLE}.
1478 > \end{equation}
1479 > Here $p$ is a momentum conjugate to $x$, $m$ is the mass associated
1480 > with this degree of freedom, $H_B$ is a harmonic bath Hamiltonian,
1481 > \[
1482 > H_B  = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ {\frac{{p_\alpha ^2
1483 > }}{{2m_\alpha  }} + \frac{1}{2}m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }
1484 > \right\}}
1485 > \]
1486 > where the index $\alpha$ runs over all the bath degrees of freedom,
1487 > $\omega _\alpha$ are the harmonic bath frequencies, $m_\alpha$ are
1488 > the harmonic bath masses, and $\Delta U$ is a bilinear system-bath
1489 > coupling,
1490 > \[
1491 > \Delta U =  - \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {g_\alpha  x_\alpha  x}
1492 > \]
1493 > where $g_\alpha$ are the coupling constants between the bath
1494 > coordinates ($x_ \alpha$) and the system coordinate ($x$).
1495 > Introducing
1496 > \[
1497 > W(x) = U(x) - \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\frac{{g_\alpha ^2
1498 > }}{{2m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 }}} x^2
1499 > \]
1500 > and combining the last two terms in Eq.~\ref{introEquation:bathGLE}, we may rewrite the Harmonic bath Hamiltonian as
1501 > \[
1502 > H = \frac{{p^2 }}{{2m}} + W(x) + \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N
1503 > {\left\{ {\frac{{p_\alpha ^2 }}{{2m_\alpha  }} + \frac{1}{2}m_\alpha
1504 > w_\alpha ^2 \left( {x_\alpha   - \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha
1505 > w_\alpha ^2 }}x} \right)^2 } \right\}}.
1506 > \]
1507 > Since the first two terms of the new Hamiltonian depend only on the
1508 > system coordinates, we can get the equations of motion for
1509 > Generalized Langevin Dynamics by Hamilton's equations,
1510 > \begin{equation}
1511 > m\ddot x =  - \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} -
1512 > \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {g_\alpha  \left( {x_\alpha   -
1513 > \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 }}x} \right)},
1514 > \label{introEquation:coorMotionGLE}
1515 > \end{equation}
1516 > and
1517 > \begin{equation}
1518 > m\ddot x_\alpha   =  - m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 \left( {x_\alpha   -
1519 > \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 }}x} \right).
1520 > \label{introEquation:bathMotionGLE}
1521 > \end{equation}
1522 > In order to derive an equation for $x$, the dynamics of the bath
1523 > variables $x_\alpha$ must be solved exactly first. As an integral
1524 > transform which is particularly useful in solving linear ordinary
1525 > differential equations,the Laplace transform is the appropriate tool
1526 > to solve this problem. The basic idea is to transform the difficult
1527 > differential equations into simple algebra problems which can be
1528 > solved easily. Then, by applying the inverse Laplace transform, also
1529 > known as the Bromwich integral, we can retrieve the solutions of the
1530 > original problems. Let $f(t)$ be a function defined on $ [0,\infty )
1531 > $, the Laplace transform of $f(t)$ is a new function defined as
1532 > \[
1533 > L(f(t)) \equiv F(p) = \int_0^\infty  {f(t)e^{ - pt} dt}
1534 > \]
1535 > where  $p$ is real and  $L$ is called the Laplace Transform
1536 > Operator. Below are some important properties of Laplace transform
1537 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1538 > L(x + y)  & = & L(x) + L(y) \\
1539 > L(ax)     & = & aL(x) \\
1540 > L(\dot x) & = & pL(x) - px(0) \\
1541 > L(\ddot x)& = & p^2 L(x) - px(0) - \dot x(0) \\
1542 > L\left( {\int_0^t {g(t - \tau )h(\tau )d\tau } } \right)& = & G(p)H(p) \\
1543 > \end{eqnarray*}
1544 > Applying the Laplace transform to the bath coordinates, we obtain
1545 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1546 > p^2 L(x_\alpha  ) - px_\alpha  (0) - \dot x_\alpha  (0) & = & - \omega _\alpha ^2 L(x_\alpha  ) + \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{\omega _\alpha  }}L(x), \\
1547 > L(x_\alpha  ) & = & \frac{{\frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{\omega _\alpha  }}L(x) + px_\alpha  (0) + \dot x_\alpha  (0)}}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}. \\
1548 > \end{eqnarray*}
1549 > By the same way, the system coordinates become
1550 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1551 > mL(\ddot x) & = &
1552 >  - \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2 }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}\frac{p}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}pL(x) - \frac{p}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}g_\alpha  x_\alpha  (0) - \frac{1}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}g_\alpha  \dot x_\alpha  (0)} \right\}}  \\
1553 >  & & - \frac{1}{p}\frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}}.
1554 > \end{eqnarray*}
1555 > With the help of some relatively important inverse Laplace
1556 > transformations:
1557 > \[
1558 > \begin{array}{c}
1559 > L(\cos at) = \frac{p}{{p^2  + a^2 }} \\
1560 > L(\sin at) = \frac{a}{{p^2  + a^2 }} \\
1561 > L(1) = \frac{1}{p} \\
1562 > \end{array}
1563 > \]
1564 > we obtain
1565 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1566 > m\ddot x & =  & - \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} -
1567 > \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ {\left( { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2
1568 > }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}} \right)\int_0^t {\cos (\omega
1569 > _\alpha  t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau } } \right\}}  \\
1570 > & & + \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ {\left[ {g_\alpha
1571 > x_\alpha (0) - \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha  }}}
1572 > \right]\cos (\omega _\alpha  t) + \frac{{g_\alpha  \dot x_\alpha
1573 > (0)}}{{\omega _\alpha  }}\sin (\omega _\alpha  t)} \right\}}
1574 > \end{eqnarray*}
1575 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1576 > m\ddot x & = & - \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} - \int_0^t
1577 > {\sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left( { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2
1578 > }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}} \right)\cos (\omega _\alpha
1579 > t)\dot x(t - \tau )d} \tau }  \\
1580 > & & + \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ {\left[ {g_\alpha
1581 > x_\alpha (0) - \frac{{g_\alpha }}{{m_\alpha \omega _\alpha  }}}
1582 > \right]\cos (\omega _\alpha  t) + \frac{{g_\alpha  \dot x_\alpha
1583 > (0)}}{{\omega _\alpha  }}\sin (\omega _\alpha  t)} \right\}}
1584 > \end{eqnarray*}
1585 > Introducing a \emph{dynamic friction kernel}
1586 > \begin{equation}
1587 > \xi (t) = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left( { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2
1588 > }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}} \right)\cos (\omega _\alpha  t)}
1589 > \label{introEquation:dynamicFrictionKernelDefinition}
1590 > \end{equation}
1591 > and \emph{a random force}
1592 > \begin{equation}
1593 > R(t) = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left( {g_\alpha  x_\alpha  (0)
1594 > - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2 }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}x(0)}
1595 > \right)\cos (\omega _\alpha  t)}  + \frac{{\dot x_\alpha
1596 > (0)}}{{\omega _\alpha  }}\sin (\omega _\alpha  t),
1597 > \label{introEquation:randomForceDefinition}
1598 > \end{equation}
1599 > the equation of motion can be rewritten as
1600 > \begin{equation}
1601 > m\ddot x =  - \frac{{\partial W}}{{\partial x}} - \int_0^t {\xi
1602 > (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }  + R(t)
1603 > \label{introEuqation:GeneralizedLangevinDynamics}
1604 > \end{equation}
1605 > which is known as the \emph{generalized Langevin equation}.
1606 >
1607 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:randomForceDynamicFrictionKernel}\textbf{Random Force and Dynamic Friction Kernel}}
1608 >
1609 > One may notice that $R(t)$ depends only on initial conditions, which
1610 > implies it is completely deterministic within the context of a
1611 > harmonic bath. However, it is easy to verify that $R(t)$ is totally
1612 > uncorrelated to $x$ and $\dot x$,$\left\langle {x(t)R(t)}
1613 > \right\rangle  = 0, \left\langle {\dot x(t)R(t)} \right\rangle  =
1614 > 0.$ This property is what we expect from a truly random process. As
1615 > long as the model chosen for $R(t)$ was a gaussian distribution in
1616 > general, the stochastic nature of the GLE still remains.
1617 > %dynamic friction kernel
1618 > The convolution integral
1619 > \[
1620 > \int_0^t {\xi (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }
1621 > \]
1622 > depends on the entire history of the evolution of $x$, which implies
1623 > that the bath retains memory of previous motions. In other words,
1624 > the bath requires a finite time to respond to change in the motion
1625 > of the system. For a sluggish bath which responds slowly to changes
1626 > in the system coordinate, we may regard $\xi(t)$ as a constant
1627 > $\xi(t) = \Xi_0$. Hence, the convolution integral becomes
1628 > \[
1629 > \int_0^t {\xi (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }  = \xi _0 (x(t) - x(0))
1630 > \]
1631 > and Eq.~\ref{introEuqation:GeneralizedLangevinDynamics} becomes
1632 > \[
1633 > m\ddot x =  - \frac{\partial }{{\partial x}}\left( {W(x) +
1634 > \frac{1}{2}\xi _0 (x - x_0 )^2 } \right) + R(t),
1635 > \]
1636 > which can be used to describe the effect of dynamic caging in
1637 > viscous solvents. The other extreme is the bath that responds
1638 > infinitely quickly to motions in the system. Thus, $\xi (t)$ can be
1639 > taken as a $delta$ function in time:
1640 > \[
1641 > \xi (t) = 2\xi _0 \delta (t)
1642 > \]
1643 > Hence, the convolution integral becomes
1644 > \[
1645 > \int_0^t {\xi (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }  = 2\xi _0 \int_0^t
1646 > {\delta (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }  = \xi _0 \dot x(t),
1647 > \]
1648 > and Eq.~\ref{introEuqation:GeneralizedLangevinDynamics} becomes
1649 > \begin{equation}
1650 > m\ddot x =  - \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} - \xi _0 \dot
1651 > x(t) + R(t) \label{introEquation:LangevinEquation}
1652 > \end{equation}
1653 > which is known as the Langevin equation. The static friction
1654 > coefficient $\xi _0$ can either be calculated from spectral density
1655 > or be determined by Stokes' law for regular shaped particles. A
1656 > briefly review on calculating friction tensor for arbitrary shaped
1657 > particles is given in Sec.~\ref{introSection:frictionTensor}.
1658 >
1659 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:secondFluctuationDissipation}\textbf{The Second Fluctuation Dissipation Theorem}}
1660 >
1661 > Defining a new set of coordinates
1662 > \[
1663 > q_\alpha  (t) = x_\alpha  (t) - \frac{1}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha
1664 > ^2 }}x(0),
1665 > \]
1666 > we can rewrite $R(T)$ as
1667 > \[
1668 > R(t) = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {g_\alpha  q_\alpha  (t)}.
1669 > \]
1670 > And since the $q$ coordinates are harmonic oscillators,
1671 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1672 > \left\langle {q_\alpha ^2 } \right\rangle  & = & \frac{{kT}}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }} \\
1673 > \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\alpha  (0)} \right\rangle & = & \left\langle {q_\alpha ^2 (0)} \right\rangle \cos (\omega _\alpha  t) \\
1674 > \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\beta  (0)} \right\rangle & = &\delta _{\alpha \beta } \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\alpha  (0)} \right\rangle  \\
1675 > \left\langle {R(t)R(0)} \right\rangle & = & \sum\limits_\alpha  {\sum\limits_\beta  {g_\alpha  g_\beta  \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\beta  (0)} \right\rangle } }  \\
1676 >  & = &\sum\limits_\alpha  {g_\alpha ^2 \left\langle {q_\alpha ^2 (0)} \right\rangle \cos (\omega _\alpha  t)}  \\
1677 >  & = &kT\xi (t) \\
1678 > \end{eqnarray*}
1679 > Thus, we recover the \emph{second fluctuation dissipation theorem}
1680 > \begin{equation}
1681 > \xi (t) = \left\langle {R(t)R(0)} \right\rangle
1682 > \label{introEquation:secondFluctuationDissipation},
1683 > \end{equation}
1684 > which acts as a constraint on the possible ways in which one can
1685 > model the random force and friction kernel.

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines