Quick search Find article
Quick search
Find article

Absence of a structural glass phase in a monatomic model liquid predicted to undergo an ideal glass transition

Charlotte Gils, Helmut G Katzgraber and Matthias Troyer

Show affiliations


Figure 1

Figure 1. Schematic plot of the interaction potential U(r) (equation (2)) between two particles with relative distance r = |rirj|. For r\in [R-r_0, R+r_0] the particles feel an attraction; otherwise the potential is zero. Note that the model is defined in the limit 1\ll r_0 \ll R . (a) The interaction potential as introduced in [11] with a hard-core radius h = 1. (b) The interaction potential modified in order to avoid a trivial particle collapse with a hard-core radius R/4 < h < R/2.



Figure 2

Figure 2. Configuration of particles after 2 × 108 Monte Carlo steps for r0 = 10, R = 100, h = 30 (i.e., Tc ≈ 0.33), T = 0.1, N = 120 and an average particle spacing ρ–1/2 ≈ 88.3.



Figure 3

Figure 3. Configuration snapshot after 3 × 109 Monte Carlo steps for r0 = 10, R = 100, h = 30 (i.e., Tc ≈ 0.33), T = 0.1, N = 1200 and an average particle distance ρ–1/2 ≈ 108 (i.e., a smaller density than in figure 2). A polycrystalline structure with randomly oriented patches of hexagonal crystal is found.



Figure 4

Figure 4. Particle configurations for N = 1000 particles (r0 = 10, R = 100, h = 30, T=0.05 \ll T_{\mathrm {c}} ) in a system with average particle distance ρ–1/2 ≈ 167. (a) Initial random configuration, (b) configuration snapshot after 2 × 107 MC steps, (c) configuration snapshot after 2 × 108 MC steps, and (d) after 5 × 109 MC steps. As in figure 3, a polycrystalline structure emerges.




View by subject




Export






Please login to access our web services, or create an account if you don't yet have one.

You must have cookies enabled in your web browser to be able to login.

Username
Password

Forgotten your password? Get a new one here.