1: %\documentstyle[preprint,prl,aps]{revtex}

2: %\documentclass[12pt]{article}

3: %\documentstyle[prl,aps]{revtex}

4: %\documentstyle[twocolumn,prl,aps]{revtex}

5: \documentstyle[aps,multicol,epsfig]{revtex}

6: %\setlength{\topmargin}{-0.1in}

7: %\setlength{\textheight}{8.5in}

8: %\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-0.1in}

9: %\setlength{\textwidth}{6.5in}

10: %\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{2}

11: %\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{0.5}

12: %\usepackage{epsfig}

13: %\usepackage{graphicx}

14: %\psfigdriver{dvips}

15: \def\vec#1{{\rm\bf #1}}

16: 

17: % \draft command makes pacs numbers print

18: \draft

19: 

20: \input epsf

21: 

22: %\def \be{\begin{equation}}

23: %\def \ber{\begin{eqnarray}}

24: %\def \ee{\end{equation}}

25: %\def \eer{\end{eqnarray}}

26: 

27: %\newcommand{\tensor}[1]{\underline{\underline{#1}}}

28: %\newcommand{\ftensor}[1]{\underline{\underline{\underline{\underline{#1}}}}}

29: 

30: \begin{document}

31: 

32: \title{Theory of Chiral Imprinting}

33: \author{Y.~Mao, M.~Warner}

34: \address{

35: Cavendish Laboratory, Madingley Road,\\

36: Cambridge, CB3 0HE,  UK.}

37: \date{\today}

38: \maketitle

39: %\count0=69

40: 

41: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

42: 

43: \begin{abstract}

44: We present a continuum model for a nematic elastomer network

45: formed in a chiral environment, for instance in the presence of a

46: chiral solvent. When this environment is removed, the network can

47: retain some memory of its chiral genesis. We predict the residual

48: chiral order parameter for a number of possible scenarios, and go

49: on to examine the robustness (stability) of the imprinted chirality. 

50: We show that a twist-untwist transition can take place,

51: which determines whether the imprinting has been successful. 

52: A transition is via a coarsening of the helical director pattern and

53: a lengthening of its pitch. Finally, the effect due to a

54: subsequent swelling by an achiral solvent, or by a solvent of

55: differing chirality, is considered.

56: \end{abstract}

57: 

58: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

59: 

60: %\section{Introduction}

61: 

62: \vspace{0.25in} \noindent {PACS numbers:} 61.30.-v, 61.41.+e,

63: 78.20.Ek

64: 

65: \begin{multicols}{2}

66: 

67:  Nematic elastomers combine the properties of a liquid

68: crystal and those of a conventional rubber. This synergy gives

69: rise to novel material behaviour, which in turn has stimulated

70: much research in past years \cite{mark}. From a general symmetry

71: argument, de Gennes \cite{degennes} first suggested that chirality

72: may be introduced to such an elastomer by simply forming it in a

73: chiral solvent. The originally achiral liquid crystalline polymer

74: would then remember the induced chirality after crosslinking, even

75: when the solvent is removed or replaced with an achiral one. This

76: is the case of chiral imprinting, which potentially can open up an

77: entirely new way of producing materials of specified optical

78: properties. Chiral imprinting, in principle, is akin to

79: crosslinking a nematic polymer under an external magnetic or

80: mechanical field \cite{mark,finklemann} where the monodomain state

81: is also permanently imprinted. Experimentally chiral imprinting

82: was studied long ago \cite{Tsutsui} as a function of solvent

83: exchange. Recently imprinting has been studied \cite{geof} as a

84: function of both solvent removal and temperature. Another measure

85: of imprinting occurs in intrinsically cholesteric networks. On

86: temperature changes that would cause a substantial pitch variation

87: in a non-crosslinked cholesteric polymer melt, the corresponding

88: network suffers essentially no variation - see for example Fig.\ 8

89: of reference \cite{max}, where also many other references to

90: cholesteric elastomers are given. In this paper, we analyse chiral

91: imprinting, and predict the retained chiral properties of the

92: elastomer when the initial chiral environment of crosslinking is

93: altered. Gradients of director variation are modeled within

94: continuum Frank nematic elasticity. The nematic elastomer penalty

95: for rotation of the director relative to the solid matrix is

96: described in a fully non-linear, rubber-elastic manner since

97: rotation can be large.

98: 

99: %\section{Theory}

100: 

101: A nematic liquid crystal has a mobile director $\vec{n}$, the

102: gradient of which incurs a Frank energy \cite{degennesbook}. For

103: the free energy density of a cholesteric liquid crystal, the twist

104: term is modified by a pitch wave number, $q_0$: $$

105: f_c \!= \!\textstyle{1 \over 2}  \!\left[K_1 (\bbox{\nabla} \!\cdot \!

106: \vec{n})^2 \!+\! K_2 (\vec{n}\! \cdot \!(\bbox{\nabla} \!\times\!

107: \vec{n})\!+\!q_0)^2 \!+\! K_3 ((\vec{n} \!\cdot \! \bbox{\nabla}) \;

108: \vec{n})^2 \right] $$ where $K_{1,2,3}$ respectively measure the

109: energy penalty for splay, twist and bend, the three possible modes

110: of the nematic director distortion.

111:  In a pure twisting, cholesteric

112: conformation of the director, we can drop the terms involving

113: $K_{1,3}$. These other contributions arise if the director moves

114: away from the helical plane and tilts toward the pitch axis. The

115: Frank energy can be viewed as a continuum description with higher

116: order spatial derivatives truncated, and it suffices for cases

117: where director varies slowly over a nematic coherence length

118: ($\sim 10$nm).

119: 

120: When liquid crystalline polymers are crosslinked into a rubber

121: network, additional constraints on $\vec{n}$ arise in the form of

122: director anchoring to the network. Anchoring manifests itself with

123: an extra energy cost \cite{degennes2} for a uniform director

124: rotation $\bbox{\omega}$ relative to a local rotation of the

125: elastic  matrix $\bbox{\Omega}$. The energy density is

126: $\textstyle{1\over 2} D_1 \; [(\bbox{\Omega}-\bbox{\omega})\times

127: \vec{n}]^2

128: %+D_2 \;\;\vec{n}\; .\; \underline{\underline{\lambda}}\; .\;[(\underline{\Omega}-\underline{\omega})\times \underline{n}]

129: $. A second term couples the relative director-matrix rotation to

130: the shearing part of the elastic strain, $\bbox{{\lambda}}$, that

131: is $D_2 \;\;\vec{n}\; .\; \bbox{{\lambda}}\;

132: .\;[(\bbox{\Omega}-\bbox{\omega})\times \vec{n}]$.  For such

133: strains to rotate the director in a cholesteric, they would have

134: to vary along the helical axis. By the requirement of elastic

135: compatibility this introduces  secondary shears. One can show that

136: these are prohibitively expensive for this geometry. We

137: accordingly ignore $\bbox{{\lambda}}$ terms.

138: %The $D_1$ terms penalises the relative misfit of nematic director and the

139: %second term describes the coupling to a mechanical distortion represented

140: %by a tensor $\underline{\underline{\lambda}}$. In fact the $D_2$ term only couples to

141: %the shearing part of $\underline{\underline{\lambda}}$. For the purpose of our analysis, we

142: %shall consider the model case of a regular helix conformation (along $z$ axis say)

143: %for the nematic director in space, therefore we drop the $D_2$ term in the same

144: %way we did the $K_{1,3}$ terms. However,

145: 

146: \vspace*{-3mm}

147: \begin{figure}[t!]

148:   \begin{center}

149:     \leavevmode

150:     %\vspace*{1cm}

151:     \epsfxsize=7.5cm

152:     \epsfbox{twist.eps}

153: \caption{A cholesteric director configuration.}

154: \vspace*{-5mm}

155:   \label{fig0}

156:   \end{center}

157: \end{figure}

158: Consider an initially regular cholesteric helix along the $z$

159: axis, Fig.\ 1.  $\theta$ is the azimuthal angle the local director makes

160: within the $x-y$ plane and is initially

161: \begin{equation}

162: \theta_0 (z)= q_0z \label{pitch}

163: \end{equation}

164: where $q_0$ is the chiral pitch wavenumber. One can generalise the

165: $D_1$ term to the large angle limit by considering a molecular

166: nematic rubber elastic model \cite{mark}.  It is no longer

167: $\textstyle{1\over 2} D_1 \; (\theta - \theta_0)^2$ but

168: $\textstyle{1\over 2} D_1 \; \sin^2 (\theta - q_0 z)$ which has

169: the correct locally nematic symmetry of $\vec{n} \equiv -\vec{n}$.

170: The energy for an elastomer formed under a cholesteric solvent

171: which is subsequently replaced with an achiral one is then:

172: \begin{equation}

173: F=\int dz\;\; \textstyle{1 \over 2}\; [K_2\; \theta'^2 + D_1 \sin ^2 (\theta - q_0 z)]

174: \label{basicF}

175: \end{equation}

176: where $'$ indicates $d/dz$. The first term in $F$ wishes to remove

177: the twist in $\vec{n}$ since now the chiral imperative of the

178: solvent is removed the usual Frank twist penalty is fully

179: incurred.  However the second term insists that $\vec{n}$ is

180: anchored to a helix thanks to the crosslinks being formed under

181: cholesteric conditions. The initial network polymers are taken to

182: be achiral, thus $q_0$ is only induced and can be tuned with the

183: choice of the chiral solvent we subject our elastomer to at

184: formation. If achiral solvent is used when crosslinking, $q_0$

185: could simply be zero, and we retrieve the description of more

186: conventional nematic elastomers \cite{mark}.

187: 

188: The two limits of the energy density are (i) the perfectly twisted

189: cholesteric state $f=\textstyle{1\over 2}K_2 q_0^2$ where the

190: current pitch wavevector is unchanged from $q_0$, and (ii) the

191: untwisted state $f=\textstyle{1\over 4}D_1$, the additional factor

192: of $\textstyle{1\over2}$ arising from the averaging of $\sin^2$

193: over one period. Thus, crudely, we expect the director to be

194: twisted if

195: \begin{equation}

196: K_2 q_0^2 < D_1/2

197: \label{condition}

198: \end{equation}

199: and untwisted otherwise, this balance being tuneable since $K_2$,

200: $D_1$ and $q_0^2$ vary relatively to each other with temperature,

201: degree of crosslinking and swelling and the presence of additional

202: chiral agents. Eq.\ (\ref{condition}) anticipates the physics of

203: our detailed results: highly twisted states ($q_0$ large) or

204: systems with a large twist constant $K_2$ will pay a very high

205: Frank penalty on loss of spontaneous twist arising from the loss

206: of the chiral solvent.  A large combination $K_2q_0^2$ will

207: overcome the anchoring $D_1$ and the elastomer will untwist -

208: imprinting will be lost.  Weakly twisted elastomers with weak

209: twist constants will not overcome director anchoring and

210: imprinting will remain.  We now analyze Eq.\ (\ref{basicF}) for

211: details of the phase behaviour.

212: 

213: To simplify matters, we begin with the following substitutions: $$

214: \phi=q_0 z\!-\!\theta \!+\! \pi/2;\quad u=z/\xi; \quad

215: \xi=\!\sqrt{K_2/D_1}; \quad \alpha=\xi q_0 $$ the angle $\phi$

216: describes the variation away from (or modulation of) the original

217: helical pattern, that is we are now in a rotating frame of

218: reference. Lengths are reduced by the nematic rubber penetration

219: depth $\xi$, the natural length scale in the problem. The

220: parameter $\alpha$ is a non-dimensional measure of the nematic

221: length relative to the chiral pitch, and the condition

222: (\ref{condition}) is equivalent to $\alpha \sim 1/\sqrt{2}$.

223: Following the remarks below Eq.\ (\ref{condition}), we expect

224: imprinting to be lost at large $\alpha$ and retained at small

225: $\alpha$. Dropping a constant arising from the variable change

226: $\theta \rightarrow \phi$, the reduced energy (per unit

227: cross-section area perpendicular to the pitch axis) is:

228: \begin{equation}

229: \tilde{F}={2F \over D_1 \xi}=\int du \;\; [(\dot{\phi}-\alpha)^2 - \sin^2 \phi ]

230: \label{easyF}

231: \end{equation}

232: where $(\,\dot{}\,)$ signifies $d/du$. If we make the analogy to

233: Lagrangian dynamics, the integrand is the Lagrangian density

234: ($L=T-V$) of a particle in a potential given by $\sin^2 \phi$. The

235: problem also now resembles the problem of an electric or magnetic

236: field applied perpendicularly to the helix of a liquid

237: cholesteric,  solved long ago by de Gennes and Meyer \cite{meyer}.

238: In reduced terms, the $\sin^2\phi$ is like the field

239: competing with the natural chirality $\alpha$.  In terms of the

240: original problem, Eq.\ (\ref{basicF}), it is as if a naturally

241: untwisted nematic has a spatially chiral electric field ``$D_1"$

242: applied to it in an attempt to induce a twist.

243: 

244: The first integral of the Euler-Lagrange equation corresponding to

245: Eq.\ (\ref{easyF}) , the elliptic equation or often called in the

246: literature the Sine-Gordon equation, leads to:

247: \begin{equation}

248: \dot{\phi}^2+\sin^2 \phi = c^2

249: \label{1stintegral}

250: \end{equation}

251: where $c^2$ is the integration constant, which has the physical

252: interpretation of total energy. The analogy is helpful, and before

253: we examine the details we already foresee two scenarios: If

254: $c^2<1$, the particle does not have sufficient energy to overcome

255: the barriers in $\sin^2 \phi$ potential and is therefore

256: localized, {\it i.e.} $-\pi/2 < \phi < \pi/2$. This corresponds to

257: the case where cholesteric pitch is largely maintained, with

258: $\phi(u)$ only introducing small modulations to the director

259: orientation. If $c^2>1$, our particle can climb out of the

260: potential valleys and travel freely; this corresponds to the case

261: of winding/unwinding the cholesteric twists in director

262: orientation.  Below, we determine $c$ in terms of $\alpha$.

263: 

264: %\subsection{Localised Limit}

265: 

266: {\it The localised limit, $c^2<1$.} Our particle oscillates

267: between two values of $\phi_m =\pm \arcsin c$. We accordingly

268: introduce a new variable $\beta$ in the interval $\beta \in [-{\pi

269: \over 2}, {\pi \over 2}]$, so that $\sin \phi \equiv c \; \sin

270: \beta$. Rewriting the derivative $\dot{\phi}$ in terms of

271: $\dot{\beta}$ and returning it to Eq.\ (\ref{1stintegral}) reduces

272: this equation to one of the standard elliptic form:

273: $\dot{\beta}=\sqrt{1-c^2 \sin^2 \beta}$. The period of the

274: oscillatory motion is found to be:

275: \begin{equation}

276: T_1=2 \int_0^{\pi \over 2} \; {d \beta \over \dot{\beta}}= 2\; {\cal K}(c).

277: \end{equation}

278: Here ${\cal K}(c)$, and later ${\cal E}(c)$, are the complete

279: elliptic integrals of the first and second kind respectively. The

280: period $T_1$ gives, in units of the characteristic length scale

281: $\xi$, the spatial repeat distance of our $\phi$-modulation of the

282: original cholesteric angle $q_0 z$. The reduced energy of a period

283: can be obtained from Eq.\ (\ref{easyF}) as:

284: \begin{eqnarray}

285: \tilde{F}_1(T_1)

286: %&=&\int_0^{T_1} du \;\; [(\dot{\phi}-\alpha)^2 - \sin^2 \phi ] \nonumber \\

287: %&=&2 \int_0^{\phi_m} \;d\phi

288: %\left[2\dot{\phi} + \textstyle{\alpha^2-c^2 \over \dot{\phi}}\right]

289: %\nonumber \\

290: &=&2[(c^2+\alpha^2-2)\;{\cal K}(c)+\! 2\;{\cal E}(c)].

291: \end{eqnarray}

292: In order to compared the stability of various states, we require

293: the reduced energy {\it density}.  In the localized regime, $c^2 <

294: 1$, we denote this by $g_1(c)$:

295: \begin{equation}

296: g_1=\tilde{F}_1(T_1)/T_1=c^2+\alpha^2-2+{2 {\cal E}(c) \over {\cal K}(c)}.

297: \label{energy1}

298: \end{equation}

299: We now require the energy density in the traveling regime.

300: %\subsection{Travelling Limit}

301: 

302: {\it The traveling limit $c^2>1$.} The modulation period down the

303: original  helix corresponds to the time taken for our particle to

304: travel from one peak to the next in the potential.  It is

305: calculated using Eq.\ (\ref{1stintegral}):

306: \begin{equation}

307: T_2=2\int_0^{\pi \over 2} \;{d\phi \over \dot{\phi}}=2k\;{\cal K}(k)

308: \end{equation}

309: where $k=1/c$, and thus $k<1$. The reduced energy of a period is:

310: \begin{eqnarray}

311: \tilde{F}_2(T_2)

312: %&=&\int_0^{T_2} du \;\; [(\dot{\phi}-\alpha)^2 - \sin^2 \phi ] \nonumber \\

313: %&=&2 \int_0^{\pi \over 2} \;d\phi

314: %\left[2\dot{\phi}-2\alpha + \textstyle{\alpha^2-c^2 \over \dot{\phi}}\right]

315: %\nonumber \\

316: &=&2[(\alpha^2-c^2)k\;{\cal K}(k)+ 2c\;{\cal E}(k)-\alpha \pi].

317: \end{eqnarray}

318: The corresponding energy density, $g_2(c)$ for $c^2 >1$, is:

319: \begin{equation}

320: %g_2=\tilde{F}_2(T_2)/T_2=\alpha^2-c^2+{2 {\cal E}(k) \over k^2\;{\cal K}(k)}

321: %-{\alpha \pi \over k\;{\cal K}(k)}.

322: g_2=\tilde{F}_2(T_2)/T_2=\alpha^2-c^2+{2 \over k\;{\cal K}(k)}

323: \left[ {{\cal E}(k) \over k}- {\alpha \pi \over 2} \right].

324: \label{energy2}

325: \end{equation}

326: 

327: %\subsection{Phase stability}

328: 

329: Combining $g_1(c)$ and $g_2(c)$, Eq.s (\ref{energy1},

330: \ref{energy2}), we now have the energy density $g(c)$ for the

331: entire range of $c$. Fig.\ 1 illustrates the energy density plots

332: for three different values of of the chiral strength, described by

333: the parameter $\alpha$.

334: 

335: \begin{figure}[t!]

336:   \begin{center}

337:     \leavevmode

338:     %\vspace*{1cm}

339:     \epsfxsize=8cm

340:     \epsfbox{gplots.eps}

341: \caption{Reduced energy density, $g(c)$, for

342: $\alpha=0.2,\;2/\pi,\;1$.  One has $g_1(c)$ for $c^2 <1$ and

343: $g_2(c)$ for $c^2 >1$.}

344:   \label{fig1}

345:   \end{center}

346: \end{figure}

347: We can see that at the transition point $c=1$ the two energy

348: densities approach each other. However, the densities are not

349: smoothly joined, forming a cusp which turns from pointing downward

350: to upward upon the parameter $\alpha$ increasing past a critical

351: value $\alpha_c=2/\pi$. Invoking the identities for differentials

352: of complete elliptic integrals: $$ {d {\cal K} \over dk}={{\cal

353: E}\over k (1-k^2)}-{{\cal K} \over k} \quad ; \; \quad {d {\cal E}

354: \over dk}={{\cal E}-{\cal K} \over k} $$ we can minimise the

355: reduced free energy with respect to $k$, or equivalently $c$, by

356: setting $dg/dc=0$. As evident from Fig.\ \ref{fig1}, minima only

357: exist in the region $c^2>1$, that is in $g_2(c)$, and only when

358: $\alpha >\alpha_c$.  There are no minima in $g_1$. The analogous

359: problem of a cholesteric liquid in the presence of an electric

360: field \cite{meyer} is similar.  The condition  $dg/dc=0$ fixes $c$

361: since, for a given $\alpha$, $k$ or $c$ must satisfy:

362: \begin{equation}

363: \alpha={2{\cal E}(k) \over \pi k} \quad {\rm for}\quad

364: \alpha>\alpha_c=2/\pi \; . \label{result}

365: \end{equation}

366: 

367: 

368: The period of $\phi(u)$ modulation is $T=2k \;{\cal K}(k)$ in

369: units of $\xi$. For each such period along the helical pitch axis,

370: $\phi$ increases by $\pi$, the director  unwinds once, and

371: therefore one loses $1$ of the $T\xi q_0/\pi \equiv 2 \alpha k

372: \;{\cal K}(k)/\pi$ twists imprinted over the interval $T$. The

373: imprinting efficiency is given by the fractional number of twists

374: lost:

375: \begin{equation}

376: e_0={2\alpha k\;{\cal K}(k) - \pi \over 2\alpha k\; {\cal K}(k)}

377: \; .

378: \end{equation}

379: Provided that $e_0$ is close to unity, much of the chirality can

380: be preserved.

381: 

382: For small chiral power $\alpha<\alpha_c = 2/\pi$, the minimising

383: condition $dg/dc=0$ has no solution and the minimum free energy

384: occurs exactly at $c=1$. The cusp has the energy density

385: $g=(2/\pi)^2-1$, and a logarithmically divergent period $T$ which

386: implies $e_0=1$. The director gets arrested, attempting to untwist

387: but never actually manages a full turn within a finite distance.

388: The imprinting is therefore successful.

389: 

390: For chiral power $\alpha > \alpha_c = 2/\pi$, minima are found for

391: $c>1$.  The period is no longer infinite and twists are lost. For

392: large $\alpha$, {\it i.e.} the nematic penetration depth large

393: compared to the cholesteric pitch, we can expand the elliptic

394: function for small $k$ to find $\alpha\sim c(1-k^2/4-3k^4/128 ...

395: )$. Alternatively $k\sim 1/\alpha(1-1/4\alpha^2 ...)$ and we find

396: a period of $T=2k\;{\cal K}(k) \sim \pi/\alpha$ in units of $\xi$.

397: Thus for every actual distance of $\pi \xi/ \alpha=\pi/ q_0$,

398: $\phi$ accumulates an increment of $\pi$. That is, $e_0\rightarrow

399: 0$,  corresponding eventually to the case of complete unwinding of

400: the imprinted helical pattern.

401: %Figure 2 shows the imprinting efficiency over a range of values of $\alpha$.

402: 

403: %(ii) for very small $\alpha$ the minimum of free energy density lies at close

404: %to $c=0$ which corresponds to the retaining of chiral twists of the nematic

405: %director.

406: %Figure 2 shows where in the $\alpha,\; c$ space, see equation (\ref{result}),

407: %the energy density is minimised.

408: %

409: \begin{figure}[t!]

410:   \begin{center}

411:     \leavevmode

412:     %\vspace*{1cm}

413:     \epsfxsize=6cm

414:     \epsfbox{eff.eps}

415:     \caption{Imprinting efficiency vs.\ network parameter $\alpha$. The slope

416: at the critical point $\alpha=\alpha_c^+$ diverges and the efficiency

417: decays rapidly.}

418:   \label{fig2}

419:   \end{center}

420: \end{figure}

421: %

422: %\subsection{Swelling}

423: 

424: In writing equation (\ref{basicF}), we have assumed that the

425: chiral solvent was completely replaced with an achiral one as was

426: the case in experiment \cite{geof}. However, we can trivially

427: generalise $F$ to the case where the current solvent is chiral:

428: \begin{equation}

429: F=\int dz\;\; \textstyle{1 \over 2}\; [K_2\; (\theta'-q)^2 + D_1

430: \sin ^2 (\theta - q_0 z)] \; ,\label{gerneralF}

431: \end{equation}

432: where $q$ is the wave number that the solvent would introduce in

433: the absence of crosslinks.

434: Our previous case corresponds to $q=0$. The mathematical procedure

435: remains applicable, with an adjustment of the parameter

436: $\alpha=\xi q_0$ to: $$ \alpha'=\xi (q_0 - q) $$ which indicates a

437: chiral environment of the same handedness can help preserve the

438: chirality by reducing the value of $\alpha$ (negative values of

439: $\alpha$ are mathematically equivalent to $-\alpha$,

440: if we switch the sign of the $\phi$ modulation). A chiral environment

441: of the other handedness, $q<0$, instead increases $\alpha$ and has

442: the opposite effect.  It reduces imprinting, as one might expect.

443: By simply varying $q$, via the solvent composition, we have a

444: powerful way to map out the wind-unwinding transition.

445: 

446: Another interesting case is the induction of a cholesteric state

447: in an initially uniform nematic network upon introducing 

448: a chiral solvent \cite{initexp}. That is $q_0=0$ and $\alpha'=\xi q$,

449: where $q$ is the chiral pitch wave number due to the chiral solvent.

450: In this case, $e_0$ given in Fig.\ 2 can be interpreted as the 

451: network resistance to imprinting - until the point $\alpha'$

452: reaches $2/\pi$ there will be no helicity induced in the network

453: at all, and thereafter it rises with $\alpha'$.

454: 

455: Finally, by varying the amount of solvent in the crossed network, we can also tune, {\it i.e.}

456: contract or expand, the volume relative to its original: $V \rightarrow \beta V$.

457: With this, we expect from molecular interpretations,

458: $K_2\rightarrow K_2 $ for a special case where the local nematic order is preserved

459: (the nematic order variation due to the solvent or temperature will be examined elsewhere),

460: but $D_1 \rightarrow D_1/\beta$ as it depends on

461: crosslink density, and finally assuming an isotropic expansion/contraction,

462: $q_0 \rightarrow q_0 \beta^{-1/3}$. Thus we have

463: $$\alpha \rightarrow \alpha \beta^{1/6},$$

464: so swelling can, albeit weakly, increase the parameter $\alpha$ in our model and

465: discourage the preservation of the imprinted chirality.

466: 

467: %\section{Conclusion}

468: In conclusion,

469: we have proposed a continuum model for chiral imprinting in nematic

470: elastomers. The model predicts the residual chirality when the chiral

471: solvent is removed. A twist-untwist transition emerges from the

472: theory, and an experimental verification of this transition

473: would be a useful test of the theory presented here. Further

474: work is focussed on the  mechanical properties of networks; we expect

475: an external mechanical field will have substantial influence on the

476: imprinting of chirality.

477: 

478: %\section{Acknowledgement}

479: \vspace{0.2in} We thank E.~M.~Terentjev, R.~B.\ Meyer,  and M.~E.\

480: Cates for useful discussions.  The problem was first suggested to

481: us by H. Finkelmann. YM is grateful to St John's College,

482: Cambridge for a research fellowship.

483: 

484: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

485: 

486: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

487: \vspace{-0.25in}

488: \bibitem{mark}M.\ Warner and E.~M.\ Terentjev, Prog.\ Polym.\ Sci.,

489: {\bf 21}, 853 (1996).

490: 

491: \bibitem{degennes}P.~G.\ de Gennes, Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf 28A}, 11 (1969).

492: 

493: \bibitem{finklemann}J.\ Kupfer and H.\ Finklemann, Makromol.\

494: Chem., Rapid Commun., {\bf 12}, 717 (1991).

495: 

496: \bibitem{Tsutsui}T.\ Tsutsui and R.\ Tanaka, Polymer, {\bf 22}, 117 (1981).

497: 

498: \bibitem{geof}C.~D.\ Hasson, F.~J.\ Davis and G.~R.\ Mitchell,

499: Chem.\ Commun., 2515 (1998).

500: 

501: 

502: 

503: \bibitem{max}G.\ Maxein, S.\ Mayer and R.\ Zentel, Macromol.,

504: {\bf 32}, 5747 (1999).

505: 

506: \bibitem{degennesbook}P.~G.\ de Gennes, and J.\ Prost,

507: {\it The Physics of Liquid Crystals}, Oxford (1993).

508: 

509: \bibitem{degennes2}P.~G.\ de Gennes, in {\it Liquid Crystals of

510: One and Two-dimensional Order}, (W.\ Helfrich and G.\ Heppke,

511: Eds), Springer, Berlin (1980).

512: 

513: \bibitem{meyer}R.~B.\ Meyer, Appl.\ Phys.\ Lett., {\bf 12}, 281 (1968);

514: and P.~G.\ de Gennes, Solid State Commun., {\bf 6}, 163 (1968).

515: 

516: \bibitem{initexp}Initial experiments performed by R.~B.\ Meyer.

517: \end{thebibliography}

518: %\begin{figure}[htb]

519: %\begin{center}

520: %\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{eight1.eps}

521: %\end{center}

522: %\caption{$\gamma(h)$ as calculated from Maier-Saupe theory.}

523: %\label{fig:gamma}

524: %\end{figure}

525: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

526: \end{multicols}\end{document}

527: 

528: \bibitem{drop}An inconsequential constant term $1$ was dropped.

529: 

530: \bibitem{SG}J.~Timonen, M.~Stirland, D.~J.\ Pilling, Y.\ Cheng,

531: R.~K.\ Bullough, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett., {\bf 56}, 2233 (1986).

532: 

533: %\bibitem{geof2}Mitchell, G.~R.\ {\it et al}, in preparation.

534: