Multipole expansion for inclusions in a lamellar phase

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

Volumn 57, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 823-828

  Turner, M S ^a,b   Sens, P ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

^b University of California   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0000316206     PISSN: 1063651X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.57.823     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. S. A. Safran, Statistical Thermodynamics of Surfaces, Interfaces, and Membranes, Frontiers in Physics (Addison Wesley, New York, 1994).
2. P. G. de Gennes and J. Prost, The Physics of Liquid Cristals, 2nd Ed. (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1993).
3. D. Chapman, Biological Membranes (Academic Press, London, 1968).
4. J. Darnell, H. Lodish, and D. Baltimore, Molecular Cell Biology (Scientific American Books, New York, 1990).
5. B. Alberts, D. Bray, J. Lewis, M. Raff, K. Roberts, and J. D. Watson, Molecular Biology of the Cell (Garland, New York, 1994).
6. Micelles, Membranes, Microemulsion, and Monolayers, edited by W. Gelbart, A. Ben-Shaul, and D. Roux (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1994).
7. F. Nallet, D. Roux, C. Quilliet, P. Fabre, and S. J. Milner, J. Phys. (France) II 4, 1477 (1994).
8. H. Huang, Biophys. J. 50, 1061 (1986); BIOJAU
9. R. Bruinsma, M. Goulian, and P. Pincus, Biophys. J. 67, 746 (1994); BIOJAU
10. N. Dan, P. Pincus, and S. A. Safran, Langmuir 9, 2768 (1993); LANGD5
11. K. Palmer, M. Goulian, and P. Pincus, J. Phys. (France) I 4, 805 (1994); JPGCE8
12. J. Phys. (France) IN. Dan, A. Berman, P. Pincus, and S. A. Safran, 4, 1713 (1994);
13. R. Netz and P. Pincus, Phys. Rev. E 52, 4114 (1995); PLEEE8
14. H. Aranda-Espinoza, A. Berman, N. Dan, P. Pincus, and S. Safran, Biophys. J. 71, 648 (1996)
15. M. Goulian, R. Bruinsma, and P. Pincus, Europhys. Lett. 22, 145 (1993)
16. R. Bar-Ziv, R. Menes, E. Moses, and S. A. Safran, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 3356 (1995)
17. S. Ramaswamy, R. Nityananda, V. A. Raghunathan, and J. Prost, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 288, 175 (1996).
18. E. M. Terent’ev, Sov. Phys. Crystallogr. 33, 637 (1988).
19. M. S. Turner and P. Sens, Phys. Rev. E 55, 1275 (1997); PLEEE8
20. P. Sens, M. S. Turner, and P. Pincus, Phys. Rev. E 55, 4394 (1997).
21. J. B. Fournier, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 4436 (1996)
22. P. G. de Gennes, J. Phys. Suppl. C4 30, 65 (1969).
23. L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, The Classical Theory of Fields (Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1975).
24. Note, however, that any boundary conditions we may wish to impose for u near the particle are strictly only satisfied for an isolated particle. As other particles approach the boundary values may deviate slightly from those at infinity. This is a result of the system minimizing the total distortion energy. In order to understand why this is happening it may help to think of ψ as a chemical potential field for the layer compression (expansion) ∂zu. This field is chosen so as to fix the distortion correctly for infinite particle separation but the boundary values deviate in an elastic fashion as the particles approach from infinity. However, we believe that our description is adequate for large enough separations, in the spirit of the perturbation expansion Eq. (1).