1: % This is e.tex -- version 1.1
2: % Dear Author,
3: % please overwrite all Xxxxxx. All you have to do!
4: % This is actually your whole manuscript!!!! Easy! Isn't it.
5: % and send this file as yourname.tex (in small letters 6 digits only)
6: % to pol@springer.de.
7: % We will accept it only if it runs without errors.
8: % Thank you The Editorial Urda Beiglb"ock
9:
10:
11: \documentclass[aps, pre]{revtex4}
12:
13: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
14: \usepackage{graphicx}
15:
16:
17:
18: \begin{document}
19:
20:
21: \title{ Entropically-Stabilized Self-compactification in Model Colloidal
22: Systems }
23: \author{Juyong Park and Alexei V. Tkachenko}
24: \affiliation{Department of Physics, University of Michigan, 500 E. University Ave., Ann
25: Arbor, 48109 MI, USA}
26:
27:
28:
29: \begin{abstract}
30: We discuss the phenomenon of spontaneous self--compactification in a model
31: colloidal system, proposed in a recent work on DNA--mediated self--assembly.
32: We focus on the effect of thermal fluctuations on the stability of
33: membrane-like self--assembled phase with in-plane square order.
34: Surprisingly, the fluctuations are shown to enhance the stability of this
35: quasi--2D phase with respect to transition to alternative 3D structures.
36:
37: {\bf PACS numbers: 64.70.Kb, 64.70.Nd}
38: \end{abstract}
39: \maketitle
40:
41:
42:
43:
44:
45: %%\DOI{123} % do not fill in
46: %%\idline{C}{1, 1--11}{1} % do not fill in
47: %%\editorial{}{}{}{} % do not fill in
48: %
49:
50: \section{Introduction}
51:
52: Effects of physical dimensionality on crystallization are among the most important
53: problems in Condensed Matter Physics. As was established by Landau and
54: Pierls \cite{LP}, the long-range crystalline order in 2D is universally
55: destroyed by thermal fluctuations. The problem has been revisited in 1970s
56: by Kosterlitz and Thouless \cite{LP}-\cite{BKT}, who have shown that
57: crystals do exist in 2D, within a new topological definition. Nevertheless,
58: their melting temperature is believed to be always lower than in 3D systems
59: (assuming the same interparticle potential). One of the manifestations of
60: this effect is the phenomenon of surface melting: a microscopic liquid layer
61: normally appear at the interface of a crystalline solid well below its bulk
62: melting temperature.
63:
64: In this paper, we describe a remarkable example \ in which the thermal
65: fluctuation \emph{stabilize} a 2D crystalline solid, embedded in 3D physical
66: space, with respect to transition to an alternative 3D structure. The model
67: system discussed below has been introduced in the recent work by one of us
68: \cite{AT}, in order to describe DNA--assisted self--assembly of colloids.
69: Its essential ingredients are cohesive interparticle interactions and
70: medium--range soft core repulsion. The binary system of same--size spheres
71: (A and B) discussed in Ref. \cite{AT}, combines the repulsive potential $%
72: U(r) $ acting between same--type particles, with A--B attraction. As was
73: shown at that work, both interactions may be induced by properly designed
74: DNA. It was found that this colloid--DNA mixture may exhibit an unusually
75: diverse phase diagram as a function of two control parameter: the relative
76: strength of attraction and repulsion, and aspect ratio $\xi /a$ ($\xi $ is
77: the range of repulsive potential $U(r)$, and $a$ is the particle diameter).
78:
79: Among various self--assembled phases expected for that system, it was
80: especially striking to find quasi-2D membrane with the in--plane square
81: order (SQ). In other words, according to our calculations, this 3D system
82: may prefer to self--assemble into a lower--dimensional structure. We will
83: refer to this phenomenon as spontaneous self--compactification. Of course,
84: there are other known examples of self--compactified structures in condensed
85: matter, such as lipid membranes \cite{membr}. However, our case is quite
86: unique because it is based on \emph{isotropic pair potentials} (in contrast
87: to anisotropic interactions between lipids, or covalent bonding of carbon
88: atoms in graphite). Note also that at the found SQ phase is not a stacking
89: of weakly coupled layers (lamella--like), but rather an isolated
90: membrane--like structure.
91:
92: In our early calculations, we have only accounted for the interplay of
93: repulsive and attractive energies, while the thermal fluctuations were
94: totally ignored. Even though this approximation is applicable when the
95: characteristic energies considerably exceed $k_{B}T$, the entropic effects
96: are expected to be significant in any realistic case. Given that
97: fluctuations are known to strongly affect 2D crystals, one might wonder
98: whether the phenomenon of self--compactification will still be present if
99: the fluctuations are introduced. Below we present the detailed study of this
100: question.
101:
102: \section{The model and its generic features}
103:
104: Before going into a specific example, we describe our model and its generic
105: features. We start with particles packed into ideal crystalline lattices,
106: whose fluctuation free energies are to be compared. The interparticle
107: potentials will be replaced with linear springs, whose spring constants
108: correspond to the second derivatives of the corresponding potentials. The
109: first derivatives of the potentials will give rise to a pre--existing
110: stresses in those springs. We consider only very short--range interactions,
111: so that any connections beyond second nearest neighbors will be neglected.
112:
113: Let $\kappa $ and $\tilde{\kappa}$ be spring constants for the first and
114: second nearest neighbor bonds, respectively. Repulsion between the second
115: nearest neighbors induces tension $\tilde{\tau}$ in $\tilde{\kappa}$%
116: --springs, which should be balanced by an appropriate compressive force $%
117: -\tau $ $\ $in $\kappa $--springs. If the interaction range $\xi $ is much
118: shorter than nearest neighbors distance $a$, one expects $\kappa \gg \tilde{%
119: \kappa}$ , and $\tau \sim \tilde{\tau}\sim \tilde{\kappa}/\xi $. \ This
120: gives rise to a hierarchy of elastic constants in this system: $\kappa \gg
121: \tilde{\kappa}$ $\gg \tau /a$. Below, we will use harmonic analysis to
122: diagonalize the phonon Hamiltonian and find the fluctational contributions
123: to Free Energies of the competing phases. As an example, we compare 2D
124: square lattice (SQ) (embedded in 3D physical space) to an alternative
125: three--dimensional phase with a very similar local structure. Figure \ref{SQ}
126: shows this 3D counterpart of SQ (referred below as "dual phase"), which also
127: has four nearest neighbors lying in one plane around each particle. The
128: difference from SQ is that now there are eight, rather than four second
129: nearest neighbors for each site. Because of this difference in the number of
130: repulsive bonds, SQ phase is generally preferred energetically over its 3D
131: dual, at the zero temperature limit. Below, we will see whether the free
132: energy balance between the two phases may be reversed by the thermal
133: fluctuations.
134:
135: \begin{figure}[tbp]
136: \includegraphics[
137: height=1.9in,
138: width=4.5in
139: ]{SQ-fig.eps}
140: \caption{SQ (a) and its 3D-dual phase (b).}
141: \label{SQ}
142: \end{figure}
143:
144: Before we present the exact results for SQ, and its 3D-dual phase, we
145: discuss certain general features of this problem. Given the hierarchy of the
146: spring constants, one can distinguish between several kinds of phonon modes.
147: Namely, there are \emph{hard} modes, which involve deformations of strong $%
148: \kappa $--springs, and \emph{soft} modes which only depend on spring
149: constant $\tilde{\kappa}$. There are $3$ degrees of freedom per particle,
150: and $2$ of them correspond to hard modes, both for 2D lattice and its 3D
151: dual phase. In 3D structure, the third mode is the soft one ($\tilde{\kappa}$%
152: -mode). However, if there were no stresses $\tau $ and $\tilde{\tau}$,
153: within harmonic approximation there would be no restoring force for the
154: out-of-plane fluctuations in the 2D structure. This means that in 2D lattice
155: the effective spring constant for the transverse modes should be of the
156: order of $\tau /a$ (since $k\gg \tilde{\kappa}\gg \tau /a$, we may
157: justifiably call these modes of 2D lattice $\emph{supersoft}$). \ Because of
158: the replacement of the soft modes with the supersoft ones, we do expect the
159: entropy of the quasi--2D structure to be higher, which will further shift
160: the free energy balance to its favor. In addition, in small--$q$ limit, the
161: out-of-plane modes in 2D structure will universally have dispersion $\sim
162: q^{4}$ (associated with bending rigidity). This will give another negative
163: correction to free energy compared to dispersion $\sim q^{2}$ of regular
164: acoustic phonons. Note that these arguments are quite universal, and can be
165: applied beyond the particular case of SQ lattice.
166:
167: \section{Example: Square vs. its 3D-dual}
168:
169: We now proceed with the discussion of the specific example, 2D SQ vs. its
170: 3D-dual phase. The latter 3D structure may be obtained from a simple cubic
171: lattice, by removing the particles occupying sites . $(2m,2k,2l+1)$ and $%
172: (2m+1,2n+1,2k)$. In this geometry, the equilibrium condition requires $\tau
173: =-2\sqrt{2}\tilde{\tau}$ , compared to $\tau =-\sqrt{2}\tilde{\tau}$ for \
174: SQ. Note that it is tension $\tilde{\tau}$ , not $\tau $ which is expected
175: to be nearly identical for the two competing structures, since it is given
176: by derivative of the potential, $-\partial _{r}U(r)$ (taken at the distance
177: of the second nearest neighbor). In contrast, $\tau $ can be considerably
178: varied by relatively small deformation of the strong $\kappa $--spring.
179:
180: An obvious choice of unit cell for 2D lattice is a square containing one
181: atom. For the 3D structure, consider a cube containing eight smaller cubes,
182: as shown on Figure \ref{SQ}(b). The particles are located at $(2m,2l,2k)+%
183: \vec{x}$, where $\vec{x}$ is $(1,0,0)$, $(1,0,0)$, $(0,0,1)$, $(1,0,1)$, $%
184: (1,1,1)$, $(1,1,0)$. The translational symmetry in this structure is
185: generated by vectors $(2,0,0)$, $(0,2,0)$ and $(1,1,1)$, i. e. the cube on
186: the picture corresponds to two unit cells. Given the translational symmetry,
187: the particle at $(1,1,1)$ is equivalent to $(0,0,0)$ (we label them as type
188: 'a' particles), $(0,1,1)$ to $(1,0,0)$ (type 'b') and $(1,0,1)$ to $(0,1,0)$
189: (type 'c'). We can now obtain Hamiltonian $H$ and calculate the phonon
190: contribution to free energy.
191:
192: The number of particles per a unit cell is, $n=1$ \ for SQ and $n=3$ for its
193: 3D-dual. For the 2D phase, displacement of a particle at (m,n) is $\vec{u}%
194: (m,l)=\sum_{\mathbf{q}}\vec{u}\left( \mathbf{q}\right) e^{i(mq_{1}+nq_{2})}$%
195: . For the 3D phase, the displacements there are three families of modes,
196: corresponding to the three types of non-equivalent particles, 'a', 'b', and
197: 'c':
198:
199: \begin{equation}
200: \left(
201: \begin{array}{c}
202: \vec{u}(2m+l,2k+l,l) \\
203: \vec{u}(2m+l+1,2k+l,l) \\
204: \vec{u}(2m+l,2k+l+1,l)%
205: \end{array}%
206: \right) =\sum\limits_{\mathbf{q}}\left(
207: \begin{array}{c}
208: \vec{u}_{a} \\
209: \vec{u}_{b} \\
210: \vec{u}_{c}%
211: \end{array}%
212: \right) _{\mathbf{q}}e^{i(\left( m-l\right) q_{1}+\left( n-l\right)
213: q_{2}+lq_{3})}
214: \end{equation}%
215: The phonon free energy has general form
216:
217: \begin{equation}
218: F^{\left( fl\right) }=-k_{B}T\log \int D\left[ u_{i}\left( \mathbf{q}\right) %
219: \right] \exp \left( -\frac{H}{k_{B}T}\right) \label{Free-en}
220: \end{equation}%
221: Here index $i=1,...,3n$ parameterizes all the modes for a given wave vector $%
222: \mathbf{q}$, and Hamiltonian $H$ is given by%
223: \[
224: H=\sum\limits_{\mathbf{q}}\gamma _{ij}\left( \mathbf{q}\right) u_{i}\left(
225: \mathbf{q}\right) u_{j}\left( -\mathbf{q}\right)
226: \]%
227: By performing the Gaussian integration over $u_{i}\left( \mathbf{q}\right) $%
228: , one can transform Eq. (\ref{Free-en}) into:
229:
230: \begin{equation}
231: F^{\left( fl\right) }=\frac{k_{B}TN}{2n}\int \frac{\mathrm{d}\mathbf{q}}{%
232: \left( 2\pi \right) ^{d}}\log \left( \det \left[ \frac{\hat{\gamma}\left(
233: \mathbf{q}\right) }{\pi k_{B}T}\right] \right) \label{dets}
234: \end{equation}%
235: The integration here is performed over a single Brilluen zone, i.e. each
236: component of the wave vector runs from $-\pi $ to $\pi $.
237:
238: Note that in our regime ( $\kappa \gg \tilde{\kappa}$ and $\kappa \gg \tau
239: /a $), one can neglect the coupling between hard and soft modes, which
240: allows one represent the determinants entering Eq. (\ref{dets}) in
241: factorized form: $\det \left[ \hat{\gamma}\left( \mathbf{q}\right) \right]
242: \simeq \det \left[ \hat{\gamma}^{\left( hard\right) }\left( \mathbf{q}%
243: \right) \right] \det \left[ \hat{\gamma}^{\left( soft\right) }\left( \mathbf{%
244: q}\right) \right] $. Furthermore, the hard modes have essentially identical
245: spectra in the both structures (corresponding to one-dimensional chain of $%
246: \kappa $-springs). Therefore, the difference of the fluctuational free
247: energies is mainly due to the soft mode contributions. In the case of SQ
248: phase, there is only one soft mode:
249: \begin{equation}
250: \det \left[ \hat{\gamma}_{2D}^{\left( soft\right) }\left( \mathbf{q}\right) %
251: \right] =\hat{\gamma}_{zz}\left( \mathbf{q}\right) =\frac{4\sqrt{2}\tilde{%
252: \tau}}{a}\sin ^{2}\left( \frac{q_{1}}{2}\right) \sin ^{2}\left( \frac{q_{2}}{%
253: 2}\right)
254: \end{equation}%
255: For the 3D--dual phase, 3 out of 9 modes are soft, namely $\left(
256: u_{ax},u_{by},u_{cz}\right) $:
257: \begin{equation}
258: \hat{\gamma}_{3D}^{\left( soft\right) }\left( \mathbf{q}\right) =2\tilde{%
259: \kappa}\left( 1+3\alpha \right) \delta _{ij}+\frac{\tilde{\kappa}\left(
260: 1+\alpha \right) }{4}\left[
261: \begin{array}{ccc}
262: 0 & \chi \left( q_{1},q_{2}\right) & \chi \left( q_{1},\tilde{q}_{3}\right)
263: \\
264: \chi \left( q_{1},q_{2}\right) & 0 & \chi \left( q_{2},\tilde{q}_{3}\right)
265: \\
266: \chi \left( q_{1},\tilde{q}_{3}\right) & \chi \left( q_{2},\tilde{q}%
267: _{3}\right) & 0%
268: \end{array}%
269: \right]
270: \end{equation}%
271: here $\alpha =\tilde{\tau}/\left( \sqrt{2}\tilde{\kappa}a\right) $,$\ \ \chi
272: \left( q,q^{\prime }\right) =\left[ 1+\cos \left( q+q^{\prime }\right) -\cos
273: \left( q\right) -\cos \left( q^{\prime }\right) \right] $, and $\tilde{q}%
274: _{3}=2q_{3}-q_{2}-q_{1}$.\ Thus,
275:
276: \begin{equation}
277: \det \left[ \hat{\gamma}_{3D}^{\left( soft\right)}%
278: \right] \simeq 8\tilde{\kappa}^{3}\left( 1+3\alpha \right) ^{3}\left[
279: 1-\varpi_{1}\left( \frac{1+\alpha }{8\left(
280: 1+3\alpha \right) }\right) ^{2}+\varpi_{2}\left(
281: \frac{1+\alpha }{8\left( 1+3\alpha \right) }\right) ^{3}\right]
282: \end{equation}%
283: Here $\varpi _{1} =\chi ^{2}\left(
284: q_{1},q_{2}\right) +\chi ^{2}\left( q_{1},\tilde{q}_{3}\right) +\chi
285: ^{2}\left( \tilde{q}_{3},q_{2}\right) $, and $\varpi _{2}=2\chi \left( q_{1},q_{2}\right) \chi \left( q_{1},\tilde{q}%
286: _{3}\right) \chi \left( \tilde{q}_{3},q_{2}\right) $. Now we can calculate
287: the fluctuational contribution into the free energy difference between the
288: two structures:
289:
290: \begin{equation}
291: \triangle F^{\left( fl\right) }\equiv F_{2D}^{\left( fl\right)
292: }-F_{3D}^{\left( fl\right) }\approx -\frac{Nk_{B}T}{2}\left[ \log \left(
293: \frac{1}{\alpha }+3\right) +2\log 2-\frac{15}{132}\left( \frac{1+\alpha }{%
294: 1+3\alpha }\right) ^{2}\right] \label{result}
295: \end{equation}%
296: Consistent with the above general arguments, we obtain $F_{2D}^{\left(
297: fl\right) }-F_{3D}^{\left( fl\right) }<0$, i.e. the entropic effects enhance
298: the stability of the self--compactified phase. One can identify the physical
299: origin of each of the three contributions at the above result. The first
300: logarithmic term is due to an entropic gain of a single fluctuation particle
301: with all of its neighbors fixed. One can see that these fluctuations are
302: enhanced in 2D case (for an arbitrary value of parameter $\alpha $), mainly
303: due to the smaller number of second nearest neighbors there. The second
304: term, $-Nk_{B}T\log 2$ represent an additional gain due to $q^{4}$
305: dispersion of the soft acoustic phonon in SQ phase. In contrast, the soft
306: modes in 3D phase correspond to optical phonons, whose dispersion gives rise
307: to the negligible third term in Eq. (\ref{result}).
308:
309: \section{Discussion}
310:
311: Since the effects responsible for the dominant contributions to our result,
312: Eq. (\ref{result}), are not specific for the above example, we expect our
313: conclusions to be rather universal, and applicable to other
314: self--compactified phases. In fact, the very same binary system introduced
315: in Ref. \cite{AT}, provides other examples of such phases, e. g. \emph{%
316: honeycomb} lattice. This structure has several 3D counterparts \cite{3Dnets}, some of which are
317: shown on Fig.(\ref{honey}). We expect the thermal fluctuations to enhance
318: the stability of honeycomb with respect to transition to alternative 3D
319: structures, as in the case of SQ.
320: \begin{figure}[tbp]
321: \includegraphics[
322: height=1.8741in,
323: width=4.4278in,
324: ]{honey.eps}
325: \caption{2D honeycomb structure(a) and two of its 3D-dual phases (b), taken from Ref. \cite{3Dnets}.}
326: \label{honey}
327: \end{figure}
328:
329: Another aspect of our observation is that the region of the phase diagram
330: corresponding to quasi-2D structures (like SQ or honeycomb), should expand
331: when thermal fluctuations are introduced. However, in this study we have not
332: discuss the transition between solid and liquid phases. In fact, the strong
333: fluctuations in 2D structures indicate that they should melt earlier than 3D
334: solid phases, which is consistent with the classical picture. In other
335: words, the thermal fluctuations enhance the stability of quasi-2D latices
336: with respect to transition to 3D crystalline structures, but not to the
337: disordered liquid phase.
338:
339: Note also that the self-compactified structure need not to be an ideal
340: crystal, even topologically. Introduction of defects such as disclination or
341: dislocation, normally associated with 2D melting, is not expected affect our
342: arguments, as long as the systems remains effectively two-dimensional. That
343: is because the dominant contribution to the free energy is associated with
344: length scales of the order of the interparticle distance. Hence, the
345: macroscopic properties and conformation of these lattices are not relevant
346: for the discussed phenomenon. As long at the large-scale behavior is
347: concern, one might expect their properties to be similar to those of
348: tethered (solid-like) membranes \cite{teth}. It should be noted that the
349: non-zero bending rigidity is known to stabilize such a membrane with respect
350: to crumpling transition.
351:
352: One may give a simple qualitative interpretation to the obtained results.
353: The self--compactification in zero-fluctuation limit corresponds to the
354: regime of the interparticle repulsion which is too weak to destabilize the
355: 2D structure, yet strong enough to cause an overall repulsion between two
356: such layers. Introduction of thermal fluctuations results in an additional
357: effective repulsion between these 2D layers, an effect very similar to
358: Helfrich interaction between conventional membranes \cite{membr},\cite%
359: {helfrich}.
360:
361: \begin{thebibliography}{9}
362: \bibitem{LP} P. M. Chaikin and T. C. Lubensky, \textsl{Principles of
363: Condensed Matter Physics}, Cambridge Univ. Press., Camebridge, UK (2000).
364:
365: \bibitem{BKT} J. Kosterlitz and D. Thouless, \textit{J. Phys. C} \textbf{6}
366: 1181(1973).
367:
368: \bibitem{AT} A.V. Tkachenko, \textit{Phys. Rev. Lett.} \textbf{89}, 148303
369: (2002).
370:
371: \bibitem{membr} S. A.Safran, \textit{Statistical Thermodynamics of
372: Surfaces,Interfaces and Membranes}, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA(1994).
373:
374: \bibitem{3Dnets} A.F. Wells, \textit{Three dimensional nets and polyhedra}",
375: Wiley, NY (1977).
376:
377: \bibitem{teth} M. Paszuski, M. Kardar, and D. Nelson, \textit{Phys. Rev.
378: Lett.} \textbf{60}, 2638 (1988).
379:
380: \bibitem{helfrich} W.Helfrich, \textit{\ Z.Naturforsch. Teil} \textbf{A33},
381: 305 (1978)
382: \end{thebibliography}
383:
384: \end{document}
385: