1: \tolerance=10000
2: \documentstyle[preprint,prl,aps,epsf]{revtex}
3: \baselineskip 0.9truecm
4: \large
5: \begin{document}
6: \draft
7: \title
8: {
9: Relaxation processes in harmonic glasses?
10: }
11: \author{
12: G.~Ruocco$^{1}$,
13: F.~Sette$^{2}$,
14: R.~Di Leonardo$^{1}$,
15: G.~Monaco$^{2}$,\\
16: M.~Sampoli$^{3}$,
17: T.~Scopigno$^{4}$ and
18: G.~Viliani$^{4}$
19: }
20: \address{
21: $^1$
22: INFM and Dipartimento di Fisica, Universit\'a di L'Aquila,
23: I-67100, L'Aquila, Italy. \\
24: $^2$
25: European Synchrotron Radiation Facility,
26: B.P. 220, F-38043 Grenoble Cedex, France. \\
27: $^3$
28: INFM and Dipartimento di Energetica, Universit\'a di Firenze,
29: I-50139, Firenze, Italy. \\
30: $^3$
31: INFM and Dipartimento di Fisica, Universit\'a di Trento,
32: I-3805, Povo, Trento, Italy.
33: }
34:
35: \date{\today}
36: \maketitle
37: \begin{abstract}
38: A relaxation process, with the associated phenomenology
39: of sound attenuation and sound velocity dispersion, is found
40: in a simulated {\it harmonic} Lennard-Jones glass. We propose to
41: identify this process with the so called {\it microscopic}
42: (or {\it instantaneous}) relaxation process observed in real
43: glasses and supercooled liquids. A model based on the memory
44: function approach accounts for the observation, and allows to
45: relate to each others: 1) the characteristic time and strength
46: of this process, 2) the low frequency limit of the dynamic structure
47: factor of the glass, and 3) the high frequency sound attenuation
48: coefficient, with its observed quadratic dependence on the momentum
49: transfer.
50: \end{abstract}
51: \vskip 1cm
52: \pacs{PACS numbers:63.50.+x, 61.43.-j, 61.43.Fs}
53:
54:
55: In a recent paper W.~G\"otze and M.R.~Mayr \cite{Goetze} adapted
56: the Mode Coupling Theory \cite{MCT} to glassy phase. This theory, as
57: shown numerically for a hard-spheres model, accounts for many of the
58: features found in the dynamic structure factor, $S(Q,\omega)$,
59: of glasses. Among these: {\it i)} The existence of propagating
60: excitations (sound waves), with an almost linear momentum transfer
61: ($Q$) dependence of their excitation energy $\Omega(Q)$, up to $Q$
62: values that are a significant fraction of $Q_o$, the maximum of the
63: static structure factor $S(Q)$. {\it ii)} The quadratic dependence
64: on $Q$ of the excitations broadening $\Gamma(Q)$, and therefore of
65: sound attenuation. {\it iii)} The temperature insensitivity of
66: $\Gamma(Q)$. {\it iv)} The development in the $S(Q,\omega)$ at
67: large $Q$ ($Q/Q_o$$\approx$0.3) of a secondary excitation band,
68: at frequencies below the Brillouin peak. The theory also predicts
69: two features not yet experimentally detected: {\it a)} A positive
70: dispersion of the sound velocity and {\it b)} an intensity "gap"
71: in the low frequency region of the $S(Q,\omega)$. In spite of
72: the success of this approach, it is still of great interest to
73: investigate the physical origin of these phenomena, and, in
74: particular, whether they are related to the topological disorder
75: and/or to the anharmonicity of the interatomic potential. %
76:
77: In this Letter we report a Molecular Dynamics (MD) simulation
78: study of the $Q$ dependence of the sound velocity in a model
79: monatomic Lennard-Jones glass in the {\it harmonic} approximation.
80: We show that even in a {\it harmonic} glass, by increasing $Q$
81: there is a positive dispersion of the sound velocity, thus proving
82: one of the prediction of the MCT theory \cite{Goetze}, and
83: relating this phenomenon to the topological disorder. Since
84: this dispersion is similar to that found in presence of a relaxation
85: process, we attempt to apply a generalized Langevin equation with an
86: effective memory function approach to describe the density fluctuations
87: dynamics. This formalism allows to account for the ubiquitous
88: $Q^2$-dependence of the high frequency sound absorption
89: observed in many glasses by experimenys \cite{Q2g} and by MD
90: simulations \cite{Q2MD,dellanna2}.
91: These results suggest to identify this process with the one
92: referred to as {\it microscopic} or {\it instantaneous}
93: relaxation in {\it real} systems.
94:
95: The investigated systems consist of $N$=2048, 10976 and 32000
96: argon atoms interacting via a (6-12) Lennard-Jones potential
97: ($\epsilon$=125.2 K, $\sigma$=3.405 A). A standard microcanonical
98: MD simulation, performed at decreasing temperatures in the normal
99: liquid phase, is followed by a fast quench ($\dot T$$\approx$
100: 10$^{12}$ K/s) of the slightly supercooled liquid down to
101: $\approx$5 K \cite{Mazz}. Starting from the glass configuration
102: at $T$=5 K, the atomic trajectories $\bar r_i(t)$
103: (here $i$=$1...N$ is the particle label) are followed and
104: stored for subsequent analysis, and the "inherent"
105: configuration $\{\bar x_i\}_{i=1..N}$ \cite{StWe} at $T$=0 K
106: is calculated by the steepest descent method. Two different
107: procedures have been used to derive the $S(Q,\omega)$:
108: (i) The trajectories calculated from MD in the glass
109: are used to compute the corresponding time correlation
110: function and (ii) The Normal Mode Analysis (NMA) is applied
111: to the inherent configuration. This last procedure works in the
112: harmonic approximation, which is obtained by retaining only the
113: quadratic term of the interaction potential. From the
114: calculation of the dynamical matrix ${\bf D}$, one computes
115: the eigenvalues, $\omega_p$ ($p$=$1..3N$ is the mode index)
116: and the eigenvectors ($\bar e_p(i)$). For large size samples
117: (where a direct diagonalization of ${\bf D}$ is not feasible)
118: the $S(Q,\omega)$ is obtained by the method of moments \cite{mom}.
119:
120: In the MD runs, the dynamics structure factor is
121: calculated from the numerical time-Fourier transform
122: of the intermediate scattering function $F(Q,t)$,
123: defined as:
124: \begin{equation}
125: \label{fqt}
126: F(Q,t)= 1/N \langle
127: \Sigma_{ij} \exp{(i \bar Q \cdot \bar r_i(t) )}
128: \exp{(-i \bar Q \cdot \bar r_j(0))}
129: \rangle .
130: \end{equation}
131: In the harmonic framework and in the classical limit,
132: the one excitation approximation of the dynamic structure
133: factor $S^{^{(1)}}\!(Q,\omega)$ is obtained
134: by the normal mode expansion of the atomic displacements:
135: \begin{equation}
136: \label{udt}
137: \bar r_i(t)=\bar x_i+
138: \sqrt{K_BT/M} \Sigma_p \bar e_p(i) A_p(t)/\sqrt{\omega_p}.
139: \end{equation}
140: $A_p(t)$ is the amplitude of the $p$-th normal mode
141: and is characterized by $\langle|A_p(t)|^2\rangle=1$.
142: This gives:
143: \begin{equation}
144: \label{sqw}
145: S^{^{(1)}}\!(Q,\omega)=
146: (K_BTQ^2/M\omega^2) \; \Sigma_p E_p(Q) \delta(\omega-\omega_p),
147: \end{equation}
148: where we have introduced the spatial power spectrum of the
149: longitudinal component of the eigenvectors, $E_p(Q)$:
150: \begin{equation}
151: \label{eqw}
152: E_p(Q)=|\Sigma_i (\hat Q \cdot \bar e_p(i))
153: \exp{{(i \bar Q \cdot \bar x_i )} |^2}.
154: \end{equation}
155: Here, $\hat Q$=$\bar Q/|Q|$ and the Debye-Waller factor
156: has been neglected. Differently from the second
157: ($\int \omega^2 S(Q,\omega) d\omega$=
158: $\int \omega^2 S^{^{(1)}}\!(Q,\omega) d\omega$=%
159: $K_BTQ^2/M$) and higher moments sum rules,
160: the zeroth moment sum rule for $S(Q,\omega)$,
161: $\int S(Q,\omega) d\omega$=$S(Q)$, does not hold for
162: $S^{^{(1)}}\!(Q,\omega)$, as in this function the
163: elastic intensity is missing. Rather, it is useful
164: to define the "inelastic" contribution to $S(Q)$:
165: $S_{_{i}}(Q)$=$\int S^{^{(1)}}\!(Q,\omega) d\omega$.
166:
167: Selected examples of the $S(Q,\omega)$ calculated for
168: different size systems, and with different methods are
169: reported in Fig.~1. As there is a trivial dependence
170: of the $S^{^{(1)}}\!(Q,\omega)$ on $T$, here we report
171: this quantity multiplied by the factor $(M/K_BT)$.
172: Figure~1a shows the $S(Q,\omega)$
173: in the low $Q$ range, as calculated from the MD
174: runs for the $N$=32000 particles system, while Fig.~1b
175: shows the intermediate $Q$ range, in the case of the
176: harmonic approximation for the $N$=2048 system.
177: As a check of consistency, the
178: inset of Fig.~1b shows the $Q$ dependence of the
179: second moment of $(M/K_BT)S(Q,\omega)$ (+) which,
180: according to the sum rule, should be $Q^2$ (full line).
181: The inset of Fig.~1a shows, at two $Q$ values, the
182: comparison of the $S(Q,\omega)$ ($N$=2048) calculated
183: either from the MD runs (full line) or in the harmonic
184: approximation ($\circ$). The $S(Q,\omega)$, as derived
185: with the two different methods, are equivalent in the
186: whole considered $Q$ range. This indicates that the
187: Newtonian dynamics at $T$=5 K is truly harmonic, and
188: that the results obtained by MD at this $T$ and NMA
189: can be interchanged among each other.
190:
191: The general features of the $S(Q,\omega)$ reported in
192: Fig.~1 are: {\it i)} A Brillouin peak, dispersing and
193: becoming broader with increasing $Q$, dominates the
194: spectrum up to $Q$$\approx$10 nm$^{-1}$
195: ({$Q/Q_o$$\approx$0.45). {\it ii)} At larger $Q$
196: values a second peak, observed at frequencies below
197: the Brillouin peak, starts to dominate the data.
198: This secondary peak has been already detected
199: in many systems: 1) in liquid water, both experimentally
200: \cite{wat97} and by MD \cite{watmix},
201: where it has been interpreted as a signature of the
202: transverse dynamics; 2) in vitreous silica, by MD,
203: where it has been interpreted either
204: in terms of a transverse dynamics \cite{dellanna2} or
205: as an evidence of the Boson peak \cite{kob}; and 3) in
206: a hard sphere glass, where it has been theoretically
207: predicted \cite{Goetze}. In this respect, it is
208: worth to underline the striking similarity
209: between the $S(Q,\omega)$ reported here and those
210: of Fig.~5 of Ref.~\cite{Goetze}. Finally,
211: {\it iii)}, the $S(Q,\omega)$ up to
212: $Q$$\approx$5 nm$^{-1}$ shows a nearly constant
213: and $Q$-independent intensity below the Brillouin
214: peak frequency. This plateau, whose value is
215: $\lim_{\omega\rightarrow 0} (M/K_BT)S(Q,\omega)$=
216: $A_0$$\approx$0.03~10$^{-18}$ s$^3$/m$^2$,
217: can be identified with the plateau observed in the
218: constant $\omega$ cuts of the $S(Q,\omega)$
219: at $Q$ larger than the Brillouin peak in simulated
220: \cite{and_v}, calculated (Fig~18 in Ref. \cite{Goetze})
221: and measured \cite{nh3} systems.
222:
223: Figure~2 shows the position of the maxima
224: ($\Omega_{_C}(Q)$) of the current spectra $C_L(Q,\omega)$
225: (=$\omega^2/Q^2S(Q,\omega)$) as a function of $Q$ in the
226: investigated $Q$ range.
227: The inset of Fig.~2 shows the peak position $\Omega(Q)$ and
228: the broadening $\Gamma(Q)$ of the $S(Q,\omega)$ in the low $Q$
229: region, as measured directly from the spectra of Fig.~1a. The $Q$
230: dependence of these parameters agrees with the behavior
231: observed in all the glasses investigated so far \cite{Q2g}:
232: a linear (square) dependece of $\Omega(Q)$ ($\Gamma(Q)$).
233: The behavior of $\Omega_{_C}(Q)$ closely resembles that of
234: the acoustic phonon branches in crystals, i.~e.
235: the almost linear behavior in the small $Q$ region, a
236: maximum around $Q_o/2$, and a minimum around $Q_o$. Most
237: importantly one can clearly detect a positive dispersion
238: of the sound velocity, as highlighted by the dashed line
239: in Fig.~2. This dispersion is better seen
240: in Fig.~3, where the apparent sound velocity,
241: $v(Q)$=$\Omega_{_C}(Q)/Q$, is reported. The quantity $v(Q)$
242: (full dots) undergoes a transition from the "low frequency"
243: \cite{nota} sound velocity $v_o(Q)$ towards the infinite frequency
244: sound velocity $v_{\infty}(Q)$.
245: Here $v_o(Q)$ is calculated as
246: $v_o(Q)$=$\sqrt{K_BT/MS_i(Q)}$ (dashed line),
247: and $v_\infty(Q)$ is calculated either as the
248: fourth moment of the calculated $S(Q,\omega)$ (open points)
249: or from the expression of the fourth moment in terms of both
250: the pair correlation function and the interaction potential
251: (full line) \cite{baluc}.
252: The velocity dispersion is observed up to $Q$$\approx$5 nm$^{-1}$,
253: i.~e. $\Omega_{_C}$$\approx$35 cm$^{-1}$, and an opposite
254: dispersion is observed in the region approaching $Q_o$.
255: These observations recall of a typicall relaxation scenario.
256: When a relaxation process with characteristic time $\tau$ is
257: active in the system, the transition from $v_o$ to $v_{\infty}$
258: takes place when the condition $\omega\tau$=1 is fulfilled. In
259: the present case, considering that the first transition is at at
260: $Q$$\approx$2 nm$^{-1}$ where $\Omega_{_C}$$\approx$15 cm$^{-1}$,
261: the value of $\tau$ results to be around 0.3 ps. The second
262: and third transitions between $v_o$ and $v_\infty$ are observed
263: just below and above $Q_o$ as a consequence of the slowing down
264: of the dynamics (deGennes narrowing) around $Q_o$.
265: Consequently the whole behavior of $v(Q)$, as reported in Fig.~3,
266: can be qualitatively understood in terms of a relaxation process
267: with a characteristic time of $\tau$$\approx$0.3 ps.
268:
269: The identification of a such a {\it relaxation process} in an
270: {\it harmonic system}, suggests to use the formalism that
271: describes the density correlators $\phi(Q,t)$=$F(Q,t)/S(Q)$
272: through its generalized Langevin equation \cite{baluc}:
273: \begin{equation}
274: \label{lang}
275: \ddot \phi(Q,t)+\omega^2_o \phi(Q,t)+
276: \mbox{$\int$}_o^t m(Q,t-t') \dot \phi(Q,t') dt =0
277: \end{equation}
278: where $\omega^2_o$=$K_BTQ^2/MS(Q)$ and $m(Q,t)$ is the
279: "memory function". This
280: equation has been rigorously derived for ergodic
281: systems, but, as recently shown in the framework of the MCT
282: \cite{Goetze},
283: it can be still applied in the non-ergodic glassy phase
284: making the the following substitutions:
285: $\phi(Q,t)\rightarrow \phi'(Q,t)$=$(\phi(Q,t)-f_{_Q})/(1-f_{_Q})$,
286: $\omega_o^2(Q)\rightarrow \omega^2_{o \mu}$
287: $\equiv$$\omega^2_{\infty \alpha}$=$K_BTQ^2/MS_i(Q)$
288: and $m(Q,t)\rightarrow m_\mu(Q,t)$=$m(Q,t)\!-\!\omega^2_o
289: f_{_Q}/(1\!-\!f_{_Q})$. Therefore, the "vibrational" dynamics
290: of interest is now described by the correlators $\phi'(Q,t)$,
291: which is obtained subtracting from $\phi(Q,t)$ the long time
292: plateau level, whose value is the non-ergodicity parameter
293: $f_{_Q}$. It is worth to note the subtraction of the constant
294: term $S(Q)f_{_Q}$ from F(Q,t) is equivalent to neglect the
295: elastic contribution in the $S(Q,\omega)$, and that
296: $F'(Q,t)$=$S_i(Q)\phi'(Q,t)$ is the Fourier transform
297: of the $S^{^{(1)}}\!(Q,\omega)$ as defined in Eq.~(\ref{sqw}).
298: The whole dynamic behavior of $\phi'(Q,t)$ is now contained in the
299: {\it microscopic} contribution to the memory function $m_\mu(Q,t)$.
300: In the case of a harmonic system, the function $m_\mu(Q,t)$ can be
301: explicitly calculated from the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the
302: system. Indeed, the Laplace transform (indicated by hats) of
303: Eq.~(\ref{lang}) (after the previously indicated substitutions)
304: and a straightforward algebra gives:
305: \begin{equation}
306: \label{langs}
307: \hat m_\mu(Q,\!s)\!=\!\left[
308: \hat \phi'(Q,s)[s^2+\omega^2_{o \mu}]\!-\!s \right]
309: \! \left[ 1\!-\!s\hat \phi'(Q,s)\right ]^{-1}.
310: \end{equation}
311: Then, from an inverse Fourier and a subsequent Laplace transform of
312: Eq.~(\ref{sqw}), it is easy to get an explicit expression for
313: $\hat \phi'(Q,s)$ to be inserted in Eq.~(\ref{langs}). This gives:
314: \begin{equation}
315: \label{ms}
316: \hat m_\mu(Q,\!s)\!=\!\!\left[ {\Sigma} \frac{E_p(Q)}
317: {\omega_p^2} \frac{s}{s^2\!\!+\!\omega^2_p}\right ] \!
318: \left[ {\Sigma} \frac{E_p(Q)}{\omega_p^2} {\Sigma}
319: \frac{E_p(Q)}{s^2\!\!+\!\omega^2_p}\right ]^{-1}
320: \!\!\!\!\!\!\!-\!s
321: \end{equation}
322: This equation provides an explicit expression of the memory function
323: in terms of the system eigenstates.
324: %Besides a detailed analysis of the time-dependence of $m_\mu(Q,\!t)$,
325: %which is beyond the aim of this work, one can access its main
326: %features from its $s$$\rightarrow$0 and $s$$\rightarrow$$\infty$ limits.
327: Considering that $m_\mu(Q,\! t)$ is mainly characterized by parameters
328: as its initial value $\Delta_{_Q}^2$ and total area $\Gamma_{_Q}$ and
329: therefore by
330: a decaying time-scale $\tau_{_Q}$$\approx$$\Gamma_{_Q}/\Delta_{_Q}^2$
331: \cite{notatau}, one can show that
332: $\hat m(Q,s$$\rightarrow$$\infty)$=$\Delta_{_Q}^2/s$ and
333: $\hat m(Q,s$$\rightarrow$0)=$\Gamma_{_Q}$ \cite{baluc}.
334: Inserting these limiting values into Eq.~(\ref{ms}) one obtains:
335: \begin{eqnarray}
336: \label{limit1}
337: \Delta_{_Q}^2&=&\left [ \Sigma_p E_p(Q)\omega^2_p \right ]-
338: \left [ \Sigma_p E_p(Q)\omega^{-2}_p \right ]^{-1}\\
339: \label{limit2}
340: \Gamma_{_Q}&=&\left[\Sigma_p \frac{E_p(Q)}
341: {\omega^2_p} \right]^{-2} \!\!\!
342: \lim_{s\rightarrow 0}
343: \left[ \Sigma_p \frac{E_p(Q)}{\omega_p^2}
344: \frac{s}{s^2\!+\!\omega^2_p}\right ]
345: \end{eqnarray}
346: It is now easy to identify, through the explicit expression of the
347: zeroth and fourth moments of Eq.~(\ref{sqw}) that
348: $\Sigma_p E_p(Q)\omega^2_p$=$v^2_\infty Q^2$ and
349: $(\Sigma_p E_p(Q)\omega^{-2}_p)^{-1}$=$v^2_o Q^2$, confirming
350: that $\Delta_{_Q}^2$=$(v_\infty^2\!-\!v_o^2)Q^2$.
351: The determination of $\Gamma_{_Q}$ which, being
352: the area of the memory function, coincides with the Brillouin
353: broadening in the $\omega\tau$$<<$1 limit is slightly more
354: involved. Using the representation
355: $\delta(x)=1/\pi \; \lim_{s\rightarrow 0} s/(s^2+x^2)$,
356: in Eq.~(\ref{sqw}) one sees that:
357: \begin{equation}
358: \label{sss}
359: S^{^{(1)}}\!(Q,\omega)\!=\!\frac{K_BTQ^2}{\pi M}
360: \lim_{s\rightarrow 0} \Sigma_p \frac{E_p(Q)}
361: {\omega_p^2} \frac{s}{s^2\!+\!(\omega\!-\!\omega_p)^2},
362: \end{equation}
363: and comparing of Eqs.~(\ref{sss}) and (\ref{limit2})
364: one gets \cite{nota2}:
365: \begin{equation}
366: \label{gamma}
367: \Gamma_{_Q}=v_o^4 Q^2 \frac{\pi M}{K_BT}
368: \lim_{\omega\rightarrow 0} S(Q,\omega).
369: \end{equation}
370: Similarly:
371: \begin{equation}
372: \label{tau}
373: \tau_{_Q} \approx \frac{v_o^4}{(v_\infty^2-v_o^2)}
374: \frac{\pi M}{K_BT} \lim_{\omega\rightarrow 0} S(Q,\omega).
375: \end{equation}
376: Considering that $\lim_{\omega\rightarrow 0} S(Q,\omega)$
377: is $Q$-independent (see Fig.~1), these expressions give
378: account of the observation in the low $Q$ region -where
379: the $Q$ dependence of $v_o$ and $v_\infty$ is negligible-
380: that the Brillouin peak broadening is proportional to $Q^2$
381: and the $\tau$ is $Q$-independent. As a check of internal
382: consistency, using the value of $A_o$ previously reported,
383: one finds $\tau$$\approx$0.6 ps and $\Gamma_{_Q}$[cm$^{-1}$]=
384: 1.35$Q^2$[nm$^{-1}$]. The value of $\tau_{_Q}$
385: overestimates the one deduced from
386: Fig.~3, and this probably due to the rough expression
387: of $\tau$ as $\Gamma_{_Q}/\Delta_{_Q}^2$. On the contrary,
388: as shown in the inset of Fig.~2,
389: $\Gamma_{_Q}$ from Eq.~(\ref{gamma}) is in excellent
390: agreement with the one directly derived from the width
391: of the $S(Q,\omega)$.
392:
393: It is worth to discuss the microscopic origin
394: of the observed relaxation process. A relaxation process
395: can be pictured as the macroscopic manifestation of
396: microscopic phenomena associated with the existence of
397: channels by which the energy stored in a given "mode" relaxes
398: towards other degrees of freedom.
399: The $S(Q^*,\omega)$, through the fluctuation-dissipation
400: relation, reflects the time evolution of the energy initially
401: stored ($t$=$t_o$) in a Plane Wave (PW) of wavelength $2\pi/Q^*$.
402: As the PW is not an eigenstate of the disordered system,
403: at $t\!>\!t_o$ there will be a transfer of amplitude from this
404: PW towards other PWs of different $Q$ values.
405: This process is controlled by the difference bewteen
406: the considered PW and the normal modes of the topologically
407: disordered glassy structure. This energy flow takes
408: place on the time scale $\tau$ as derived from Eq.~(\ref{tau}),
409: and gives rise to the observed relaxation process phenomenology.
410: Consequently, one can speculate that this process is the
411: {\it instantaneous} or {\it microscopic} process
412: empirically introduced to explain the
413: $S(Q,\omega)$ measured in real glasses and liquids
414: by Brillouin light and x-ray Scattering \cite{cumm,IXS}.
415:
416: We thanks W.~G\"otze for helpful discussions and
417: critical readings of the manuscript.
418:
419: \begin{references}
420:
421: \bibitem{Goetze}
422: W.~G\"otze and M.~R.~Mayr,
423: Phys. Rev. {\bf E61}, 0000 (2000);
424: {\it ibidem} cond-mat/9910054.
425:
426: \bibitem{MCT}
427: W.~G\"otze,
428: J. of Phys.: Condens. Matt. {\bf 11}, A1 (1999)
429:
430: \bibitem{Q2g}
431: F.~Sette, M.~Krisch, C.~Masciovecchio, G.~Ruocco
432: and G.~Monaco, Science {\bf 280}, 1550 (1998),
433: and references therein.
434:
435: \bibitem{Q2MD}
436: S.N.~Taraskin and S.R.~Elliot,
437: Phys. Rev. {\bf B56}, 8605 (1997);
438: {\it ibidem} Europhys. Lett. {\bf B39}, 37 (1997);
439: M.C.C.~Ribeiro, M.~Wilson, and P.A.~Madden
440: J. Chem. Phys. {\bf 108}, 9027 (1998);
441: J.L.~Feldman, P.B.~Allen, and S.R.~Bickham,
442: Phys. Rev. {\bf B59}, 3551 (1999).
443:
444: \bibitem{dellanna2}
445: R.~Dell'Anna, G.~Ruocco, M.~Sampoli, G.~Viliani.
446: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 80}, 1236 (1998).
447:
448: \bibitem{Mazz}
449: V.~Mazzacurati, G.~Ruocco, M.~Sampoli,
450: Europhys. Lett. {\bf 34}, 681 (1996).
451:
452: \bibitem{StWe}
453: F.H.~Stillinger, and T.A.~Weber,
454: Phys. Rev. {\bf A28}, 2408 (1983).
455:
456: \bibitem{mom}
457: C.~Benoit, E.~Royer, and G.~Poussigue G.,
458: J. Phys.: Condens. Matt. {\bf 4}, 3125 (1992);
459: G.~Viliani, R.~Dell'Anna, O.~Pilla, M.~Montagna, G.~Ruocco,
460: G.~Signorelli, and V.~Mazzacurati,
461: Phys. Rev. {\bf B52}, 3346 (1995).
462:
463: \bibitem{wat97}
464: F.~Sette, G.~Ruocco, M.~Krisch, C.~Masciovecchio,
465: R.~Verbeni, U.~Bergmann. Phys. Rev. Lett.
466: {\bf 77}, 83 (1996). G.~Ruocco and F.~Sette,
467: J. Phys:Cond. Matt. {\bf 11}, R259 (1999).
468:
469: \bibitem{watmix}
470: M.~Sampoli, G.~Ruocco, F.~Sette.
471: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 79}, 1678 (1997).
472:
473: \bibitem{kob}
474: J.~Horbach, W.~Kob, and K.~Binder,
475: cond-mat/9901162.
476:
477: \bibitem{and_v}
478: M.~Sampoli, P.~Benassi, R.~Dell'Anna,
479: V.~Mazzacurati, G.~Ruocco,
480: Phil. Mag. {\bf 77}, 473 (1998).
481:
482: \bibitem{nh3}
483: F.~Sette, G.~Ruocco, A.~Cunsolo, C.~Masciovecchio,
484: G.~Monaco, and R.~Verbeni, preprint.
485:
486: \bibitem{nota}
487: "Low frequency" means here the relaxed side
488: of the {\it microscopic} relaxation process, that in a
489: glass coincides with the fully unrelaxed, high frequency,
490: side of the frozen structural ($\alpha$) process.
491:
492: \bibitem{notatau}
493: This "relaxation time" $\tau_{_Q}$ can be interpreted as
494: the time needed by a set of harmonic oscillators of
495: different frequencies to dephase each others.
496:
497: \bibitem{baluc}
498: U.~Balucani and M.~Zoppi,
499: {\it Dynamics of the Liquid State},
500: (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1994).
501:
502: \bibitem{nota2}
503: Eq.~(\ref{gamma}) can also be derived from the Fourier
504: transform of Eq.~(\ref{lang}), i.~e.
505: $S(Q,\omega)$= $S(Q)\tilde \phi(Q,\omega)$=
506: $S(Q) \omega^2_{o\mu}(Q)/\pi \omega Im
507: \left[ \omega^2-\omega_{o\mu}^2(Q)-i\omega\tilde
508: m(Q,\omega) \right]^{-1}$,
509: performing the $\omega$$\rightarrow$0
510: limit, and remembering that the area of the
511: memory function is $\tilde m'(Q,\omega=0)$.
512:
513: \bibitem{cumm}
514: H.Z.~Cummins
515: J. of Phys.: Condens. Matt. {\bf 11}, A95 (1999)
516: and references therein.
517:
518: \bibitem{IXS}
519: G.~Monaco et al., Phys. Rev. {\bf E60}, 5505 (1999).
520: A.~Cunsolo et al., preprint;
521: T.~Scopigno et al., preprint.
522:
523: \end{references}
524:
525: \newpage
526:
527: \begin{figure}[f]
528: \caption[short fig description]{ \footnotesize{
529: The quantity $(M/K_BT)S(Q,\omega)$ is reported in absolute
530: value at the indicated $Q$ values for a) the very low $Q$
531: region ($N$=32000, MD calculation)
532: and b) the intermediate $Q$ region ($N$=2048, NMA calculation).
533: The inset of a) shows the comparison ($N$=2048) of the
534: MD $S(Q,\omega)$ (full line) and the NMA
535: $S^{^{(1)}}\!(Q,\omega)$ ($\circ$).
536: The inset of b) shows the $Q$ dependence of $M^{(2)}$, the
537: second moment of $(M/K_BT)S(Q,\omega)$ (+) and its
538: theoretical prediction $M^{(2)}_{th}$=$Q^2$ (full line).
539: }}
540: \label{fig1}
541: \end{figure}
542: \noindent
543:
544: \begin{figure}[f]
545: \caption[short fig description]{ \footnotesize{
546: Frequency position of the maxima of the longitudinal current
547: spectra ($\Omega_M(Q)$) for different indicated size samples.
548: The inset shows in log-log scale the maxima ($\Omega(Q)$)
549: and the broadening ($\Gamma(Q)$) of the Brillouin peaks
550: in the low $Q$ region. The full line is the prediction
551: according to Eq.~(\ref{gamma}) and the dashed line is
552: the best fit to the data.}}
553: \label{fig2}
554: \end{figure}
555: \noindent
556:
557: \begin{figure}[f]
558: \caption[short fig description]{ \footnotesize{
559: Sound velocity in glassy LJ Argon: apparent sound velocity ($v$,
560: full symbols), zero frequency sound velocity ($v_o$, dashed line)
561: and ininite frequency sound velocity ($v_\infty$, full line
562: and open symbols).
563: }}
564: \label{fig3}
565: \end{figure}
566: \noindent
567:
568:
569:
570: \end{document}
571:
572: