Tests of dynamical scaling in three-dimensional spinodal decomposition

Physical Review E - Statistical Physics, Plasmas, Fluids, and Related Interdisciplinary Topics

Volumn 59, Issue 3, 1999, Pages R2535-R2538

  Jury, S I ^a   Bladon, P ^a   Krishna, S ^a,b   Cates, M E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0000108448     PISSN: 1063651X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.59.R2535     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. E. D. Siggia, Phys. Rev. A 20, 595 (1979).
2. H. Furukawa, Adv. Phys. 34, 703 (1985).
3. A. J. Bray, Adv. Phys. 43, 357 (1994).
4. See, e.g., K. Kubota, N. Kuwahara, H. Eda, and M. Sakazume, Phys. Rev. A 45, R3377 (1992)
5. S. H. Chen, D. Lombardo, F. Mallamace, N. Micali, S. Trusso, and C. Vasi, Prog. Colloid Polym. Sci. 93, 331 (1993)
6. T. Hashimoto, H. Jinnai, H. Hasegawa, and C. C. Han, Physica A 204, 261 (1994).
7. F. J. Alexander, S. Chen, and D. W. Grunau, Phys. Rev. B 48, 634 (1993). A precise (Formula presented) value is not given; our best estimate gives (Formula presented) and (Formula presented)
8. M. Laradji, S. Toxvaerd, and O. G. Mouritsen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2253 (1996). In addition to the dataset analyzed here, these authors give several smaller ones from which we have not attempted to extract b values.
9. S. Bastea and J. L. Lebowitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 3499 (1997).
10. C. Appert and S. Zaleski, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 1 (1990). Data spans (Formula presented) is much larger at each t than in our datasets or those of 67. (We cannot explain this.) No linear fits were offered by these authors.
11. P. J. Hoogerbrugge and J. M. V. A. Koelman, Europhys. Lett. 19, 155 (1992)
12. R. D. Groot and P. B. Warren, J. Chem. Phys. 107, 4423 (1997)
13. P. Español and P. B. Warren, Europhys. Lett. 30, 191 (1995).
14. S. I. Jury, P. Bladon, M. E. Cates, and S. Krishna (unpublished).
15. K. E. Novik and P. V. Coveney (unpublished).
16. We convert the data of 7 to our own definition of L. Conversion factors are deduced from our own simulations; this is valid so long as Eq. (1) actually holds.
17. T. Koga and K. Kawasaki, Phys. Rev. A 44, R817 (1991).
18. S. Puri and B. Dünweg, Phys. Rev. A 45, R6977 (1992).
19. W. Ma, A. Maritan, J. R. Banavar, and J. Koplik, Phys. Rev. A 45, R5347 (1992)
20. A. Shinozaki and Y. Oono, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 173 (1991). No linear regime was reported.
21. One possible difference is that Ref. 7 describes a relatively compressible fluid. This objection does not apply to our own DPD simulations, described below, for which we have checked that the relevant ratio (Mach number/Reynolds number) remains small 10. (We thank V. Kendon for assistance with this.)
22. J. S. Rowlinson and B. Widom, Molecular Theory of Capillarity (Oxford University Press, New York, 1982)
23. M. P. Allen and D. J. Tildesley, Computer Simulations of Liquids (Clarendon, Oxford, 1987).
24. A. W. Lees and S. F. Edwards, J. Phys. C 5, 1921 (1972).
25. These comments are based in part on more numerous runs made for smaller system sizes.
26. Alternatively one could assume that finite size effects, within each run, extend far below the length scale at which visible saturation of the (Formula presented) curves begin. (No universal scaling could then be expected in our data: see Fig. 11.) Our data provides no independent evidence to support this idea; see Ref. 10.
27. J. Kurchan and L. Latoux, J. Phys. A 29, 1929 (1996).
28. J. Eggers, Rev. Mod. Phys. 69, 865 (1997)
29. J. EggersPhys. Rev. Lett. 71, 3458 (1993).
30. A dependence of b on (Formula presented) could be distinguished from one on (Formula presented) by doing larger simulations, systematically varying the particle density, or by using different simulation methods to address the same range of t. (The latter is work in progress.) We can make no direct comparison with 67 since the definition of h must depend on the simulation method; but if we take h as the mean interparticle spacing, we can estimate that (Formula presented) for the data of Ref. 6 and (Formula presented) for that of Ref. 7.
31. Analagous to the logarithmic correction to the diffusion constant of thin rods; see, e.g., M. Doi and S. F. Edwards, The Theory of Polymer Dynamics (Clarendon, Oxford, 1986).
32. Very recent work has shown a breakdown of scaling, for somewhat different reasons, in the two dimensional case also. See A. J. Wagner and J. M. Yeomans, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 1429 (1998).
33. T. E. Faber, Fluid Dynamics for Physicists (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1995).