Polymer depletion effects near mesoscopic particles

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

Volumn 59, Issue 6, 1999, Pages 6853-6878

  Hanke, A ^a   Eisenriegler, E ^b   Dietrich, S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WUPPERTAL   (Germany)

^b FORSCHUNGSZENTRUM JÜLICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE;

EID: 0000537809     PISSN: 1063651X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.59.6853     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. Colloid Physics, Proceedings of the Workshop on Colloid Physics, University of Konstanz, Germany, 1995 [Physica A 235 (1997)].
2. P. R. Sperry, H. B. Hopfenberg, and N. L. Thomas, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 82, 62 (1980).
3. R. Verma, J. C. Crocker, T. C. Lubensky, and A. G. Yodh, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 4004 (1998).
4. Y. N. Ohshima, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 3963 (1997)
5. Phys. Rev. Lett.D. Rudhardt, C. Bechinger, and P. Leiderer, 81, 1330 (1998).
6. S. Asakura and F. Oosawa, J. Chem. Phys. 22, 1255 (1954)
7. S. AsakuraF. OosawaJ. Polym. Sci. 33, 183 (1958).Based on ideas in these pioneering papers, an approximate polymer-particle interaction has been introduced for the case in which the polymer size is small compared with the particle size by considering the polymer as a hard sphere (PHS) with a fixed radius of the order of the Flory radius; see, e.g.
8. A. Vrij, Pure Appl. Chem. 48, 471 (1976)
9. H. de Hek and A. Vrij, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 84, 409 (1981).
10. J. F. Joanny, L. Leibler, and P. G. de Gennes, J. Polym. Sci., Polym. Phys. Ed. 17, 1073 (1979).
11. P. G. de Gennes, C. R. Acad. Sci. (Paris) 288B, 359 (1979).
12. T. Odijk, Macromolecules 29, 1842 (1996)
13. T. OdijkJ. Chem. Phys. 106, 3402 (1996).
14. Excluded volume effects for dilute or semidilute solutions of free polymers interacting with colloidal particles have been investigated by means of integral equation techniques; see, e.g.
15. (a) M. R. Shaw and D. Thirumalai, Phys. Rev. A 44, 4797 (1991)
16. (b) A. Yethiraj, C. K. Hall, and R. Dickman, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 151, 102 (1992)
17. (c) P. G. Khalatur, L. V. Zherenkova, and A. R. Khokhlov, Physica A 247, 205 (1997).
18. For computer simulations in the case of a semidilute polymer solution, see (d) R. Dickman and A. Yethiraj, J. Chem. Phys. 100, 4683 (1994).
19. J. F. Joanny, J. Phys. (France) 49, 1981 (1988).
20. K. M. Jansons and C. G. Phillips, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 137, 75 (1990).
21. E. J. Meijer and D. Frenkel, J. Chem. Phys. 100, 6873 (1994).
22. R. Lipowsky, Europhys. Lett. 30, 197 (1995).
23. E. Eisenriegler, A. Hanke, and S. Dietrich, Phys. Rev. E 54, 1134 (1996).In the main text this reference will be denoted as I.
24. P. G. de Gennes, Scaling Concepts in Polymer Physics (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1979).
25. We use the phrase “excluded volume interaction” exclusively for the repulsive interaction between chain monomers and not for the interaction between a colloidal particle and a chain monomer.
26. J. des Cloizeaux and G. Jannink, Polymers in Solution (Clarendon, Oxford, 1990).
27. L. Schäfer, Excluded Volume Effects in Polymer Solutions as Explained by the Renormalization Group (Springer, Heidelberg, 1999).
28. (a) E. Eisenriegler, Polymers near Surfaces (World Scientific, Singapore, 1993);(b) in Field Theoretical Tools in Polymer and Particle Physics, edited by H. Meyer-Ortmanns and A. Klümper, Lecture Notes in Physics Vol. 508 (Springer, Heidelberg, 1998).
29. For a review, see, e.g., U. Seifert and R. Lipowsky, in Structure and Dynamics of Membranes, edited by R. Lipowsky and E. Sackmann (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1995), Vol. 1.
30. Y. Jayalakshmi and E. W. Kaler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 1379 (1997).
31. P. A. Buining, A. P. Philipse, and H. N. W. Lekkerkerker, Langmuir 10, 2106 (1994).
32. F. Gittes, B. Mickey, J. Nettleton, and J. Howard, J. Cell Biol. 120, 923 (1993).
33. The superscript (Formula presented) stands for one-body contribution (compare Sec. I C).
34. (a) P. G. de Gennes, J. Phys. Chem. 94, 8407 (1990)
35. (b) R. Balian and C. Bloch, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 60, 401 (1970)
36. Ann. Phys. (N.Y.)(b) R. BalianC. Bloch64, 271 (1971)
37. Ann. Phys. (N.Y.)(b) R. BalianC. Bloch84, 559 (1974)
38. (c) B. Duplantier, Physica A 168, 179 (1990).
39. F. David, in Statistical Mechanics of Membranes and Surfaces, edited by D. Nelson, T. Piran, and S. Weinberg (World Scientific, Singapore, 1988).
40. W. Helfrich, Z. Naturforsch. C 28, 693 (1973).
41. K. Yaman, P. Pincus, and C. M. Marques, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 4514 (1997)
42. K. Yaman, M. Jeng, P. Pincus, C. Jeppesen, and C. M. Marques, Physica A 247, 159 (1997).
43. H.-G. Döbereiner, E. Evans, M. Kraus, U. Seifert, and M. Wortis, Phys. Rev. E 55, 4458 (1997).
44. Throughout this work we treat the actual common solvent of the particles and the polymers as an inactive background medium so that without polymers the dilute particles behave as an ideal gas. In the context of Eq. (1.10) the “solvent” of the particles is formed by the polymers which are separated from the ideal gas phase of the particles, e.g., by a semipermeable membrane.
45. Examples for such lengths are the distances from the particle of a fixed end of the chain, of specific points of the local monomer density distribution of the chain, or of another boundary which is impenetrable for the chain.
46. Since the particle is impenetrable and acts upon each monomer of the chain with a hard repulsive potential (Formula presented) the Boltzmann weight (Formula presented) equals one for chain configurations (Formula presented) that do not intersect the particle and equals zero otherwise.
47. The interaction of a self-avoiding walk with a cylinder of microscopic radius (needle) in three dimensions also gives rise to the exponent (Formula presented) [compare S. Caracciolo, M. S. Causo, and A. Pelissetto, J. Phys. A 30, 4939 (1997)], but cannot be characterized by the universal amplitude (Formula presented)
48. (a) T. W. Burkhardt and E. Eisenriegler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 3189 (1995)
49. (b) E. Eisenriegler and U. Ritschel, Phys. Rev. B 51, 13 717 (1995).
50. K. Binder, in Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena, edited by C. Domb and J. L. Lebowitz (Academic, London, 1983), Vol. 8, p. 1.
51. H. W. Diehl, in Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena, edited by C. Domb and J. L. Lebowitz (Academic, London, 1986), Vol. 10, p. 75
52. H. W. Diehl, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 11, 3503 (1997).
53. (a) D. J. Amit, Field Theory, the Renormalization Group, and Critical Phenomena (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1978);(b) J. Zinn-Justin, Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phenomena (Clarendon, Oxford, 1989).
54. (a) M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, Handbook of Mathematical Functions (Dover, New York, 1972);(b) I. S. Gradshteyn and I. M. Ryzhik, Table of Integrals, Series, and Products (Academic, London, 1965).
55. For the renormalization in the presence of curved surfaces, see K. Symanzik, Nucl. Phys. B 190, 1 (1981).
56. For a table of inverse Laplace transforms see, e.g., Tables of Integral Transforms, edited by A. Erdélyi (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1954), Vol. I.
57. A bending of the membrane surface towards the solution also occurs for rigid nonadsorbing particles instead of polymers; see, e.g., R. Lipowsky and H.-G. Döbereiner, Europhys. Lett. 43, 219 (1998).
58. The dashed line in Fig. 22 is known rather accurately by means of the (Formula presented) expansion of (Formula presented) in conjunction with the exact value of (Formula presented) 37.
59. For example, for (Formula presented) and ideal chains the reduced free energy increase (Formula presented) vanishes for (Formula presented) as (Formula presented) 10 involving a logarithm which should be compared with the power-law decay (Formula presented) with (Formula presented) for chains with EV interaction in (Formula presented).
60. Methods based on conformal invariance allow one to reduce (Formula presented) for arbitrary D to a half-space amplitude 60 and, for the particular dimension (Formula presented), even to a bulk amplitude 67. The latter can be evaluated by using Bethe ansatz results 68 and the ratio (Formula presented) considered in Eq. (C12).
61. Compare G. Flöter and S. Dietrich, Z. Phys. B 97, 213 (1995).
62. R. P. Sear, Phys. Rev. E 57, 1983 (1998).
63. For a review see G. Fleer, M. Cohen-Stuart, J. Scheutjens, T. Cosgrove, and B. Vincent, Polymers at Interfaces (Chapman and Hall, London, 1993).
64. The problem of the effective interaction between a line perturbation and a planar wall in a critical Gaussian field theory has been considered by H. Li and M. Kardar, Phys. Rev. A 46, 6490 (1992). These authors find that it is necessary to introduce explicit regularization cutoffs which are nonuniversal parameters. However, in a critical (Formula presented) field theory in (Formula presented) such regularization cutoffs are not necessary because in this case the small radius expansion for the field theory applies (see Appendix B), resulting in a universal dependence of the effective interaction on (Formula presented) and R.
65. B. Duplantier, J. Phys. (Paris) 47, 1633 (1986).
66. The anisotropy of the dumbbell becomes visible only beyond the leading order.
67. Here one may replace the sum in Eq. (3.18a) by an integral according to the Euler-MacLaurin formula in Eq. (A2) where the terms proportional to (Formula presented) and (Formula presented) have to be included.
68. A detailed discussion of the polymer depletion interaction between a spherical particle and a planar wall is given in A. Bringer, E. Eisenriegler, F. Schlesener, and A. Hanke, Eur. Phys. J. B (to be published).
69. The Derjaguin expression of the free energy of interaction between two large spheres with the same radius R follows from the corresponding free energy between a sphere and a planar wall in Eq. (14) in Ref. 57 by replacing the prefactor R with (Formula presented). The reason is a corresponding replacement in the local distance (Formula presented) in Ref. 57.
70. For (Formula presented) our crude estimate is off by only 20%. The reason for the larger deviation in the case of (Formula presented) could be that (Formula presented) is still too small for a comparison with the universal asymptotics.
71. A discussion of the validity of the PHS model in the case of the solvation free energy for a single particle is given in I.
72. The effective radius (Formula presented) of the polymer “spheres” may be adjusted to (Formula presented) by comparing the free energy change on immersing a single large sphere in the unbounded solution. This leads to (Formula presented) [compare Eq. (3.10) in I].
73. E. Eisenriegler, Phys. Rev. E 55, 3116 (1997).
74. K. R. Myers, M. Nemirovsky, and K. F. Freed, J. Chem. Phys. 97, 2790 (1992).
75. J. L. Cardy, in Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena, edited by C. Domb and J. L. Lebowitz (Academic, London, 1986), Vol. 11, p. 55.
76. T. W. Burkhardt and E. Eisenriegler, J. Phys. A 18, L83 (1985).
77. C. M. Bender and S. A. Orszag, Advanced Mathematical Methods for Scientists and Engineers (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1978).
78. The function (Formula presented) has the property that the integral in Eq. (A7) is dominated by contributions from the (Formula presented) interval (Formula presented) with (Formula presented). Alternatively, we observe that the integrand in Eq. (A7) approaches its limit for (Formula presented) uniformly with respect to (Formula presented) (compare section 6.2 in Ref. 61).
79. E. Eisenriegler, Z. Phys. B 61, 299 (1985).
80. Compare Eq. (4.8) in I where (Formula presented) is denoted by (Formula presented) and where the bare “chain length” (Formula presented) is denoted by L. See also the argument in Ref. 19(b) according to which (Formula presented) can be read off by rewriting the right-hand side of Eq. (B1) for large (Formula presented) as (Formula presented) where (Formula presented) follows from (Formula presented) in Eq. (B2) upon replacing (Formula presented) by (Formula presented) as defined in Eq. (C7).
81. The square of the large square bracket in the expression (B21) is one of the factors which arises in the product (Formula presented) [see Eq. (2.7c)]. By calculating the right-hand side of Eq. (B16), the remaining factor and the integration over (Formula presented) (which replaces the integration over (Formula presented) of Fourier transformed quantities) lead to an integral over (Formula presented) identical to the one in Eq. (B9). This gives rise to the factor (Formula presented) in Eq. (B19).
82. V. S. Dotsenko and V. A. Fateev, Nucl. Phys. B 240, 312 (1984)
83. Nucl. Phys. BV. S. DotsenkoV. A. Fateev251, 691 (1985).
84. T. W. Burkhardt, E. Eisenriegler, and I. Guim, Nucl. Phys. B 316, 559 (1989).
85. J. Cardy and G. Mussardo, Nucl. Phys. B 410, 451 (1993).
86. J. L. Cardy and A. J. Guttmann, J. Phys. A 26, 2485 (1993).