# Analysis and Experiments for a Computational Model of a Heat Bath

- 65 Downloads
- 9 Citations

## Abstract

A question of some interest in computational statistical mechanics is whether macroscopic quantities can be accurately computed without detailed resolution of the fastest scales in the problem. To address this question a simple model for a distinguished particle immersed in a heat bath is studied (due to Ford and Kac). The model yields a Hamiltonian system of dimension 2*N*+2 for the distinguished particle and the degrees of freedom describing the bath. It is proven that, in the limit of an infinite number of particles in the heat bath (*N*→∞), the motion of the distinguished particle is governed by a stochastic differential equation (SDE) of dimension 2. Numerical experiments are then conducted on the Hamiltonian system of dimension 2*N*+2 (*N*≫1) to investigate whether the motion of the distinguished particle is accurately computed (i.e., whether it is close to the solution of the SDE) when the time step is small relative to the natural time scale of the distinguished particle, but the product of the fastest frequency in the heat bath and the time step is not small—the underresolved regime in which many computations are performed. It is shown that certain methods accurately compute the limiting behavior of the distinguished particle, while others do not. Those that do not are shown to compute a different, incorrect, macroscopic limit.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## REFERENCES

- 1.U. Ascher and S. Reich, On some difficulties in integrating highly oscillatory Hamiltonian systems,
*Proc. Alg. for Macromolecular Modelling*, 1997.Google Scholar - 2.U. Ascher and S. Reich, The midpoint scheme and variants for Hamiltonian systems: Advantages and pitfalls,
*SIAM J. Sci. Comp.*, to appear.Google Scholar - 3.F. Bornemann and Schütte, Homogenization of Hamiltonian systems with a strong constraining potential,
*Physica D***102**:57–77 (1997).Google Scholar - 4.A. J. Chorin, A. Kast, and R. Kupferman, On the prediction of large-scale dynamics using underresolved computations. Submitted to
*AMS Contemporary Mathematics*, 1998.Google Scholar - 5.A. J. Chorin, A. Kast, and R. Kupferman, Unresolved computation and optimal predictions,
*Comm. Pure Appl. Math.*, to appear.Google Scholar - 6.A. J. Chorin, A. Kast, and R. Kupferman, Optimal prediction of underresolved dynamics,
*Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA***95**:4094–4098 (1998).Google Scholar - 7.B. Cano, A. Stuart, E. Süli, and J. Warren, Stiff oscillatory systems, delta jumps and white noise, Technical Report SCCM-99-01, http://www-sccm.stanford.edu/pub/sccm/sccm-99-01.ps.gz.Google Scholar
- 8.G. W. Ford, J. T. Lewis, and R. F. O'Connell, Quantum Langevin equation,
*Phys. Rev. A***37**:4419–4428 (1988).Google Scholar - 9.G. W. Ford and M. Kac, On the quantum Langevin equation,
*J. Stat. Phys.***46**:803–810 (1987).Google Scholar - 10.O. Gonzalez and J. C. Simo, On the stability of symplectic and energy-momentum algorithms for nonlinear Hamiltonian systems with symmetry,
*Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng.***134**:197–222 (1996).Google Scholar - 11.I. S. Gradshteyn and I. M. Ryzhik,
*Table of Integrals, Series and Products*(Academic Press, New York, 1965).Google Scholar - 12.H. Grubmüller and P. Tavan, Molecular dynamics of conformational substates for a simplified protein model,
*J. Chem. Phys.***101**:5047–5057 (1994).Google Scholar - 13.J. Honerkamp,
*Stochastic Dynamical Systems: Concepts Numerical Methods, Data Analysis*(VCH Publishers, New York, 1994).Google Scholar - 14.V. Jakšić and C.-A. Pillet, Ergodic properties of the Langevin equation,
*Lett. Math. Phys.***41**:49–57 (1997).Google Scholar - 15.N. V. Krylov,
*Introduction to the Theory of Diffusion Processes*, AMS Translations of Monographs, Volume 142 (1994).Google Scholar - 16.C. Lubich, Integration of stiff mechanical systems by Runge-Kutta methods,
*ZAMP***44**:1022–1053 (1993).Google Scholar - 17.M. Mandziuk and T. Schlick, Resonance in the dynamics of chemical systems simulated by the implicit midpoint scheme,
*Chem. Phys. Lett.***237**:525–535 (1995).Google Scholar - 18.H. Mori, Transport, collective motion, and Brownian motion,
*Prog. Theor. Phys.***33**:423–455 (1964).Google Scholar - 19.S. Nordholm and R. Zwanzig, A systematic derivation of generalized Brownian motion theory,
*J. Stat. Phys.***13**:347–371 (1975).Google Scholar - 20.C. S. Peskin and T. Schlick, Molecular dynamics by the backward Euler method,
*Comm. Pure Appl. Math.***XLII**:1001–1031 (1989).Google Scholar - 21.H. Rubin and P. Ungar, Motion under a strong constraining force,
*Comm. Pure. Appl. Math Appl. Math.***X**:65–87 (1957).Google Scholar - 22.T. Schlick, M. Mandziuk, R. Skeel and K. Srinivas, Nonlinear resonance artifacts in molecular dynamics simulations,
*J. Comp. Phys.***140**:1–29 (1998).Google Scholar - 23.R. D. Skeel, G. Zhang, and T. Schlick, A family of symplectic integrators: Stability, accuracy and molecular dynamics applications,
*SIAM J. Sci. Comp.***18**:203–222 (1997).Google Scholar - 24.R. Zwanzig, Ensemble method in the theory of irreversibility,
*J. Chem. Phys.***33**:1339–1341 (1960).Google Scholar