1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: %\documentclass{article}
3: \usepackage[dvips]{graphicx}
4: \begin{document}
5:
6: \title{Corrections to a mean number of droplets in
7: nucleation}
8:
9: \author{Victor Kurasov}
10:
11:
12:
13: \maketitle
14:
15: \begin{abstract}
16:
17: Corrections to a mean number of
18: droplets appeared in the process of
19: nucleation have been analyzed. The
20: two stage model with a fixed boundary
21: can not lead to a write result. The
22: multi stage
23: generalization of this model also can
24: not give essential changes to the two
25: stage model. The role of several first
26: droplets have been investigated and it
27: is shown that an account of only first
28: droplet with further appearance in
29: frame of the theory based on the
30: averaged characteristics can lead to a
31: suitable results. Both decay of
32: metastable phase and smooth variations
33: of external conditions have been
34: investigated.
35: \end{abstract}
36:
37:
38: \section{Introduction}
39:
40:
41: Up to the last years
42: a kinetic descriptions of nucleation
43: processes were based on the averaged
44: intensity of droplets appearance,
45: i.e. on the rate of nucleation. Namely the rate of
46: nucleation is considered as a central
47: characteristic
48: of the first order phase transition.
49: But the supercritical droplets appear in the system
50: occasionally and this
51: feature has to be taken into account.
52: Since \cite{Vest}, \cite{Koll}, \cite{Kolldyn}
53: several attempts to include
54: stochastic effects of droplets
55: appearance were made. Unfortunately,
56: they could not give an adequate and rather
57: precise description of stochastic effects.
58:
59: The arguments in
60: justification of kinetics based on
61: the averaged characteristics (see \cite{PhysRevE94})
62: remain valid even after
63: stochastic formulation of
64: the nucleation problem has been presented.
65: When the number of droplets in the system is
66: very big the result of
67: the theory based on the averaged characteristics
68: (TAC) is precise. Namely the
69: number of droplets is the
70: central
71: characteristic of the nucleation process and it is
72: calculated in experiments.
73: When the number of droplets
74: appeared in a system isn't so
75: great (in the free molecular
76: regime of growth it occurs
77: only due to a volume
78: of a system) one can
79: speak about corrections to a mean
80: value of the total number
81: of droplets appeared in the
82: system in comparison with result predicted by TAC.
83: This value will be the main
84: object of investigation here.
85:
86: In diffusion regime of the droplets
87: growth the kinetic
88: description is based on special models (see
89: \cite{PhysicaA}) and
90: there is no need to analyze this
91: regime here. So, in this paper
92: only the free molecular
93: regime of droplets growth will be considered.
94:
95: In investigation of stochastic effects of nucleation
96: one can see rather easy that
97: the first correction terms
98: are equal to zero. So, there
99: appear a problem to calculate the higher terms of
100: decomposition. It is rather difficult to
101: perform precise
102: calculations and we shall be interested at
103: least to get
104: estimates for these coefficients
105: to prove the smallness of
106: the total amount of corrections. But
107: even the
108: calculation
109: of the very first terms meets technical
110: difficulties
111: (see \cite{Kolldyn}, \cite{Koll}).
112: One has also to stress that the zero shift
113: found in these papers was a natural result
114: of linearization
115: made to overcome technical difficulties.
116: Then it can not be considered there as a
117: true physical result,
118: but only the consequence of lineariazation.
119: So, it is necessary to
120: propose a method to calculate
121: the estimates for
122: coefficients in asymptotic expansions
123: due to stochastic
124: corrections of nucleation.
125:
126:
127:
128: There are two characteristic situations of external
129: conditions in which kinetics of nucleation
130: ordinary was constructed.
131: These conditions are:
132: \begin{itemize}
133: \item
134: decay of metatsable phase when at
135: some moment the metastable phase is created
136: and later there
137: is no external influence on the system;
138: \item
139: smooth variation of
140: external influence on the system.
141: \end{itemize}
142: In both situations
143: corrections will be established.
144:
145:
146: The structure of the further analysis
147: is following:
148: \begin{itemize}
149: \item
150: At first we shall analyze the two
151: stage model with a fixed boundary. The
152: result will be disappointing - one can
153: not reproduce the results of numerical
154: simulation. This
155: corresponds to the difficulties
156: of this model in prediction of the
157: value of dispersion.
158: \item
159: To improve results we shall use the
160: multi stage generalization of the last
161: model. But corrections to the two stage
162: model will be small and this can not
163: lead to suitable results.
164: \item
165: Then a new approach will be used. We
166: shall analyze the role of stochastic
167: appearance of the first droplets.
168: Results will be very fruitful and one
169: can see that already account of one
170: droplet will lead to success.
171: \item
172: All these considerations will be made
173: both for decay of metastable phase and
174: for the smooth variations of external
175: conditions.
176: \end{itemize}
177:
178:
179: \section{Decay of metastable phase}
180:
181:
182: The kinetics of nucleation in frames of
183: the theory based on averaged characteristics (TAC)
184: can be described
185: by the following equation
186: $$
187: g(z) = \int_0^{z} (z-x)^3 \exp(-g(x)) dx
188: $$
189: where unknown function $g$ is the
190: renormalized value of
191: the number of molecules in a liquid
192: (new) phase. This
193: result can be found in \cite{Monodec}.
194: The meaning of variables $z,x$ can be
195: also found in
196: \cite{Monodec}.
197: Since \cite{Monodec} it is known that one can
198: describe kinetics in frames of
199: monosdisperce
200: apporoximation, i.e.
201: $$
202: g(z) = N_{eff}(z) z^3
203: $$
204: where
205: $N_{eff}$ is the effective number of
206: droplets in monodisperce
207: peak, namely
208: $$
209: N_{eff} (z) = z/4
210: $$
211:
212:
213:
214: The monodisperce approximation
215: can be chosen as the fixed (not floating)
216: monodisperce
217: approximation (see \cite{Monodec}) and leads
218: to the following expession for the
219: size spectrum
220: $$
221: f(x) = f_* \exp(-N_{eff} x^3)
222: $$
223: Here $f_*$ is the amplitude of spectrum,
224: $$
225: N_{eff} = N(\Delta x / 4)
226: $$
227: and
228: $\Delta x$ is a width of a whole
229: spectrum (connected with the
230: duration of a nucleation period).
231:
232: The total number of droplets
233: can be obtained on the base of $f$ as
234: $$
235: N_{tot} = \int_0^{\infty} dx f(x)
236: $$
237:
238: For $N_{eff}$ we have a Gaussian distribution
239: with standard dispersion since formation of the
240: first
241: $N_{eff}$ droplets can be treated as the sequence
242: of independent events
243: $$
244: P(N_{eff} )
245: \sim
246: \exp(- \frac{(N_{eff} - <N_{eff}> )^2 }{ 2 <N_{eff}> })
247: $$
248: Here $<N_{eff}>$ is the mean value of $N_{eff}$
249:
250:
251: Then for the averaged
252: value of $N_{tot}$, i.e. for $<N_{tot}>$ we have
253: the following formula
254: $$
255: <N_{tot}> =
256: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} d N_{eff} P(N_{eff})
257: f_* \int_0^{\infty} \exp(-N_{eff} x^3) dx
258: $$
259:
260: Now with the help of formula
261: $$
262: \int dy \exp(-ya) \exp(-c (y-b)^2 ) \sim
263: \exp(- ba + \frac{a^2}{4 c})
264: $$
265: we fulfill integration over $N_{eff}$.
266: Here $b = <N_{eff}>$, $a=x^3$, $c^{-1} = 2
267: <N_{eff}>$.
268: As the result we have
269: \begin{equation} \label{tt}
270: <N_{tot}> \sim \int_0^{\infty} \exp(-<N_{eff}> x^3 +
271: \frac{x^6}{2} <N_{eff}> )
272: dx
273: \end{equation}
274: The second term in exponent, i.e. $\frac{x^6}{2}
275: <N_{eff}>$ is the correction term
276: which can be seen
277: from
278: $$
279: <N_{tot}> \sim f_*^{3/4} \int_0^{\infty}
280: \exp(- y^3 +
281: \frac{y^6}{2 <N_{eff}>} )
282: dy
283: $$
284:
285: As a rough estimate we can take $y$ in correction
286: term as $y \approx 1$ and get
287: $$
288: <N_{tot}> = <N_{tot\ 0}> \exp(\frac{1}{2 <N_{eff}> })
289: $$
290: where $<N_{tot\ 0}>$ is the value $N_{tot}$
291: calculated without
292: stochastic effects taken into account,
293: i.e. in frames of
294: TAC. Then for this value one can get expression
295: $$
296: <N_{tot\ 0}> \sim \int_0^{\infty}
297: \exp(-<N_{eff}> x^3 )
298: dx
299: $$
300: Having noticed that
301: $$
302: <N_{eff}> \approx <N_{tot\
303: 0 } >/ 4
304: $$
305: we get
306: $$
307: <N_{tot}> = <N_{tot\ 0}> \exp(\frac{2}{ <N_{eff}>
308: })
309: $$
310: Decomposition of exponent gives
311: $$
312: <N_{tot}> = <N_{tot\ 0}> + 2 +
313: \frac{2}{<N_{tot\ 0}> }
314: + ...
315: $$
316:
317:
318: Another more balanced variant of
319: consideration is to use
320: decomposition of
321: $$
322: \exp(
323: \frac{x^6}{2} <N_{eff}> ) =
324: 1 +\frac{x^6}{2} <N_{eff}> + \frac{x^{12}}{8}
325: <N_{eff}>^2
326: $$
327: already in (\ref{tt}).
328: At least the integral then will have no problems
329: with convergence.
330: We have
331: $$
332: <N_{tot}> \sim \int_0^{\infty} \exp(-<N_{eff}> x^3
333: )(
334: 1 +\frac{x^6}{2} <N_{eff}> + \frac{x^{12}}{8}
335: <N_{eff}>^2
336: )
337: dx
338: $$
339: Integration can be fulfilled separately for every
340: term in decomposition.
341: Then we come to
342: $$
343: <N_{tot}> = <N_{tot\ 0}> + A_1 + \frac{A_2}
344: {<N_{tot\ 0}>}
345: + ...
346: $$
347: where constants $A_1$ and $A_2$ are given by
348: % fail addition1.mws
349: $$
350: A_1 = 2 \int_0^{\infty} \exp(-y^3) y^6 dy /
351: \int_0^{\infty}
352: \exp(-y^3) dy
353: = 8/9
354: $$
355: $$
356: A_2 = 2 \int_0^{\infty} \exp(-y^3) y^{12} dy /
357: \int_0^{\infty}
358: \exp(-y^3) dy
359: = 510/89 = 6.91
360: $$
361:
362: From the functional forms of expressions for
363: $A_i$ one can
364: see that $A_1$ is determined rather smart
365: while the error
366: in $A_2$ can be essential. The reason is
367: the rapidly growing
368: term $y^{12}$ in subintegral function.
369: Already $y^{6}$ in
370: expression for $A_1$ grows too rapidly.
371: So, in subintegral
372: functions the main role belong to $y$
373: corresponding to
374: droplets appeared at the very end
375: of the nucleation period.
376: But the form of spectrum $\sim \exp(-y^3) $
377: is determined at
378: the
379: back side of spectrum (i.e. at $y > 1$ )
380: with a low accuracy.
381: In
382: TAC the weight of such droplets was
383: negligible and the result
384: was accurate.
385: Here the error can be essential. That's why it
386: is reasonable to restrict
387: the decomposition only by
388: the first term $A_1$.
389:
390:
391: In Figure 1 one can see the results
392: of numerical simulation
393: (oscillating curve) and
394: analytical approximation (smooth
395: monotonuous
396: curve) for the relative value
397: $$
398: P = <N_{tot}> / <N_{tot\ 0}> -1
399: $$
400:
401: % fail addition2a.mwz
402:
403: \begin{figure}[hgh]
404:
405:
406: \includegraphics[angle=270,totalheight=10cm]{pic1.eps}
407:
408: \begin{caption}
409: {
410: Numerical and analytical solutions in the situation of
411: decay. The initial monodisperce approximation is
412: considered.
413: }
414: \end{caption}
415: \end{figure}
416:
417:
418: One can see that there is no satisfactory coincidence
419: between the theoretical result and the result of
420: simulation. The reason is the roughness
421: of monodisperce
422: approximation used in \cite{Monodec} and applied
423: here.
424:
425: Now we shall take a more
426: refined approximation used to
427: calculate the value of
428: dispersion initiated by stochastic
429: appearance of droplets in the process of decay
430: \cite{Decaydispersion}. This approximation is the
431: following: the
432: length of formation of monodisperce spectrum
433: is $2*l$ where $l=0.2$; the monodisperce
434: spectrum is formed at $2*l - b$ where $b=0.336$. The
435: derivation of this approximation can be found in
436: \cite{Decaydispersion}.
437: Here
438: $$
439: <N_{tot\ 0}> = 2l -b + \int_0^{\infty}
440: \exp(-2lx^3) dx
441: $$
442:
443:
444: Then one has to reconsider the value of $A_1$.
445: It can be done only rather
446: approximately.
447: One
448: can see that $A_1$ is reciprocal to
449: the total number of droplets in
450: monodisperce
451: spectrum which is now $2*l = 0.4$ instead of
452: $0.25$ in initial monodisperce approximation.
453: Then instead of previous
454: $A_1$ one has to take
455: $$
456: A_1 \rightarrow
457: A_1 0.25 /0.4 = 1/3.6
458: $$
459: The results are shown in Figure 2
460:
461: % fail addition2b.mwz
462:
463: \begin{figure}[hgh]
464:
465:
466: \includegraphics[angle=270,totalheight=10cm]{pic2.eps}
467:
468: \begin{caption}
469: {
470: Numerical and analytical solutions
471: in the situation of
472: decay. The shifted monodisperce
473: approximation is
474: considered.
475: }
476: \end{caption}
477: \end{figure}
478:
479: Here the coincidence between curves became better
480: but it is not still satisfactory. This
481: means that the model with a fixed
482: boundary can not give a good result.
483: This corresponds to the difficulties in
484: calculation of dispersion on the base
485: of the model with a fixed boundary
486: \cite{statiae}.
487:
488:
489: \section{Smooth variations of external conditions}
490:
491:
492:
493: In the situation of smooth variation of external
494: conditions (so called dynamic conditions) we can
495: fulfill the same procedure.
496:
497: The evolution equation in TAC looks like
498: $$
499: g = c^{-1} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} (z-x)^3 \psi(x)
500: \exp(-g(x)) dx
501: $$
502: where $\psi = \exp(x)$ describes the
503: change of external conditions
504: and the renormalization to cancel the coefficient
505: in $\psi$ is used. As a compensation
506: for such renormalization
507: the coefficient
508: $c=0.189$ or $c=1/6$
509: (it depends on the type of choice of
510: the base of decompositions (see \cite{PhysRevE94}))
511: appears.
512:
513: Here we shall use the
514: monodisperce approximation also.
515: The monodisperce approximation was proposed in
516: \cite{Monodyn} where all details can be found.
517: In the fixed monodisperce approximation one can
518: write
519: $$
520: f = f_* \exp(x- <N_{eff}> (x+3)^3)
521: $$
522: for the spectrum of droplets sizes.
523: Here the effective number of droplets is given
524: by
525: $$
526: N_{eff} = \frac{6 c}{27} , \ \ \ c=0.189
527: $$
528: or
529: $$
530: N_{eff} = \frac{1}{27}
531: $$
532:
533: For the total number of droplets we have an
534: evident expression
535: $$
536: N_{tot} = f_* \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dx
537: \exp(x- <N_{eff}> (x+3)^3 )
538: $$
539:
540:
541: For the mean total number of droplets one can get
542: $$
543: <N_{tot}> = f_* \int d N_{eff} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dx
544: \exp(x- <N_{eff}> (x+3)^3 )
545: P(N_{eff})
546: $$
547: where $P(N_{eff})$ is the distribution function
548: for the quantity of effective droplets.
549:
550: For $P(N_{eff})$ we have an evident Gaussian
551: distribution with dispersion of ideal gas
552: $$
553: P(N_{eff}) \sim \exp( - \frac{(N_{eff} -
554: <N_{eff}>)^2}{2 <N_{eff}>}
555: $$
556:
557: Having fulfilled integration one gets
558: $$
559: <N_{tot}> \sim f_* \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
560: dx \exp(x - <N_{eff}> (x+3)^3)
561: \exp(\frac{(x+3)^6}{2} <N_{eff}>)
562: $$
563:
564: Certainly, the last integral doesn't
565: converge. We need a regularization
566: which will be done below.
567:
568: Then one has to decompose
569: $$
570: \exp(\frac{(x+3)^6}{2} <N_{eff}>)
571: = 1 +\frac{(x+3)^6}{2} <N_{eff}>
572: + \frac{(x+3)^{12}}{8} <N_{eff}>^2 + ...
573: $$
574: and then one can fulfill integration for every
575: term. Now the integral has no problems with
576: convergence.
577:
578:
579: In above formulas $<N_{eff}> = 1/27$
580: which is a natural
581: requirement to use the
582: monodisperce approximation. To
583: calculate correction terms one has to
584: include
585: explicitly the volume of the
586: system $V$ (i.e. the real mean
587: number of droplets).
588: Now we shall give the
589: explicit formulas for correction terms.
590: We have to calculate the value
591: $$
592: <N_{tot}> =
593: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dx \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
594: \exp(x-\frac{N_{eff}}{V} (x+3)^3 )
595: \exp(-\frac{(N_{eff} -
596: \tilde{N_{eff}})^2}{2 \tilde{N_{eff}}} d
597: N_{eff}
598: $$
599: $$
600: \tilde N_{eff} \equiv < N_{eff} >
601: $$
602: Earlier we decomposed
603: $\exp(-\frac{(N_{eff} - \tilde{N_{eff}})^2}{2
604: \tilde{N_{eff}}})$
605: and had some problems with convergence. Now we
606: shall decompose
607: $\exp(x-\frac{N_{eff}}{V} (x+3)^3 )$.
608: At first we shall present
609: this exponent as
610: $$
611: \exp(x-\frac{N_{eff}}{V} (x+3)^3 ) =
612: \exp(x-\frac{\tilde{N_{eff}}}{V} (x+3)^3 )
613: \exp(-(\frac{N_{eff}}{V} -
614: \frac{\tilde{N_{eff}}}{V}) (x+3)^3 )
615: $$
616: The decomposition of the last exponent gives
617: $$
618: \exp(-(\frac{N_{eff}}{V} -
619: \frac{\tilde{N_{eff}}}{V}) (x+3)^3 ) =
620: 1+ (x+3)^3 \frac{N_{eff} - \tilde{N_{eff}}}{V} +
621: \frac{(x+3)^6}{2}\frac{(N_{eff} -
622: \tilde{N_{eff}})^2}{V^2}+
623: $$
624: $$
625: \frac{(x+3)^9}{6}\frac{(N_{eff} -
626: \tilde{N_{eff}})^3}{V^3}+
627: \frac{(x+3)^{12}}{24}
628: \frac{(N_{eff} - \tilde{N_{eff}})^4}{V^4}
629: $$
630:
631:
632: The calculation of integrals gives
633: $$
634: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \exp(-\frac{(N_{eff} -
635: \tilde{N_{eff}})^2}{2 \tilde{N_{eff}}} ) d N_{eff} =
636: \sqrt{\pi} (2 \tilde{N_{eff}})^{1/2}
637: $$
638: $$
639: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \exp(-\frac{(N_{eff} -
640: \tilde{N_{eff}})^2}{2 \tilde{N_{eff}}} )
641: (N_{eff} - \tilde{N_{eff}})^2 d N_{eff} =
642: \frac{1}{2} \sqrt{\pi} (2 \tilde{N_{eff}})^{3/2}
643: $$
644: $$
645: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \exp(-\frac{(N_{eff} -
646: \tilde{N_{eff}})^2}{2 \tilde{N_{eff}}} )
647: (N_{eff} - \tilde{N_{eff}})^4 d N_{eff} =
648: \frac{3}{4} \sqrt{\pi} (2 \tilde{N_{eff}})^{5/2}
649: $$
650:
651: We have to notice that $\tilde{N_{eff}} = V/27$.
652: Then we have the decomposition
653: $$
654: <N_{tot}> = <N_{tot} (V=\infty) >
655: (1 + \frac{1}{2 V^2} \tilde{N_{eff}}
656: \frac{
657: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
658: \exp(x - \frac{1}{27} (x+3)^3) (x+3)^6 dx
659: }
660: {
661: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
662: \exp(x - \frac{1}{27} (x+3)^3) dx
663: }
664: $$
665: $$
666: +
667: \frac{1}{8 V^4} \tilde{N_{eff}}^2
668: \frac{
669: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
670: \exp(x - \frac{1}{27} (x+3)^3) (x+3)^{12} dx
671: }
672: {
673: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
674: \exp(x - \frac{1}{27} (x+3)^3) dx
675: })
676: $$
677:
678: Now we have to note that the lower limit of
679: integrations has to
680: be put $x=-3$ because the monodisperce
681: approximation begins to
682: work only at $x>-3$.
683: The region $x <3$ has
684: negligible influence in the total
685: amount of droplets.
686: Then
687: $$
688: <N_{tot}> = <N_{tot} (V=\infty) >
689: (1 + \frac{1}{2 V^2} \frac{2 \tilde{N_{eff}} }{2}
690: \frac{
691: \int_{-3}^{\infty}
692: \exp(x - \frac{1}{27} (x+3)^3) (x+3)^6 dx
693: }
694: {
695: \int_{-3}^{\infty}
696: \exp(x - \frac{1}{27} (x+3)^3) dx
697: }
698: $$
699: $$
700: +
701: \frac{3}{24 V^4} \tilde{N_{eff}}^2
702: \frac{
703: \int_{-3}^{\infty}
704: \exp(x - \frac{1}{27} (x+3)^3) (x+3)^{12} dx
705: }
706: {
707: \int_{-3}^{\infty}
708: \exp(x - \frac{1}{27} (x+3)^3) dx
709: }
710: $$
711:
712: Here there were no problems with
713: convergence.
714: We can calculate
715: the integrals numerically which gives
716: % grupppa program "my"
717: $$
718: <N_{tot}> =
719: <N_{tot} (V= \infty) >
720: (1+ \frac{A_1}{<N_{tot} (V= \infty) >} +
721: \frac{A_2}{<N_{tot} (V= \infty) >^2} + ...
722: $$
723: $$
724: A_1 =
725: \frac{1}{2*27^2} \frac{\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
726: \exp(x-\frac{1}{17} (x+3)^3 ) (x+3)^6 dx}
727: {\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
728: \exp(x-\frac{1}{17} (x+3)^3 ) dx}
729: = 1.7
730: $$
731: $$
732: A_2 =
733: \frac{1}{8*27^4} \frac{\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
734: \exp(x-\frac{1}{17} (x+3)^3 ) (x+3)^{12} dx}
735: {\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
736: \exp(x-\frac{1}{17} (x+3)^3 ) dx}
737: = 8.1
738: $$
739: This is the final result.
740:
741: Again one has
742: to note that $A_2$ is determined with
743: uncertainty caused by approximate
744: description of the back
745: side of spectrum. Here $A_2$ is
746: calculated to see that
747: there is no singularities in decomposition.
748: Again it is
749: reasonable to take into account only the first
750: correction term.
751:
752: In the situation of the
753: smooth behaviour of external
754: conditions there is no moment of start.
755: The point of formation of monodisperce
756: spectrum is $z=-3$ and it is
757: determined in the internal point.
758: So, when we observe the
759: subintegral
760: function it has a maximum not in the boundary
761: point (as
762: in decay when it is $z=0$) but in an internal
763: point near $z=-3$. The subintegral function
764: $(z-x)^3 \psi(x)
765: \exp(-g(x))$
766: is rather symmetric around $x=-3$ (in decay
767: one can not imagine that the subintegral function
768: is
769: symmetric around the boundary point).
770:
771:
772: Numerical simulation and analytical result
773: can be seen
774: in Figure 3.
775: % fail addition3.mwz
776:
777: \begin{figure}[hgh]
778:
779:
780: \includegraphics[angle=270,totalheight=10cm]{pic3.eps}
781:
782: \begin{caption}
783: {
784: Numerical simulation and analytical
785: solution under the
786: smooth external conditions. The
787: dependence of $P$ over the
788: volume of the system $V \equiv x $ is plotted.
789: }
790: \end{caption}
791: \end{figure}
792:
793: One can not see the satisfactory coincidence
794: between
795: theoretical result (monotonuous curve)
796: and numerical
797: siulation (oscillating curve).
798: So, the used model can not give the
799: good results.
800:
801:
802: To the data of numerical simulation
803: one can suggest a phenomenological approximation
804: $$
805: N \sim V (1 +\frac{A}{V}+ ... )
806: $$
807: $$
808: A=5/6
809: $$
810:
811:
812:
813: One can establish the universality also
814: in stochastic
815: formulation of the problem. Then the parameter $A$
816: is no more than a universal constant.
817: The numerical simulation
818: gives $A=5/6$. Generally speaking one
819: can stop here
820: all investigations.
821:
822:
823:
824: So, the model with a fixed boundary
825: failed in determination of corrections
826: to the number of droplets. One has to
827: turn to the models with floating
828: boundary which was succesfully applied
829: in \cite{Decaydispersion}, \cite{floatingdindisp}
830: to the calculation of dispersion. But
831: in the models with a floating boundary
832: the correction to the mean number of
833: droplets is zero. This isn't the error
834: of the model but the level of
835: description is limited here.
836:
837: The next step in consideration is to
838: analyze whether one can reconsider the
839: previous results . The fact is that in
840: nucleation one can see some balancing
841: forces. This can require the addition
842: more detailed analysis containing
843: several stages model instead of two
844: stages.
845:
846:
847:
848: \section {Three stage scheme}
849:
850: In nucleation under the smooth behavior of external
851: conditions one can observe the specific property of
852: compensation which can damage the
853: previous consideration.
854: One can analytically
855: observe the fact of compensation
856: briefly described below
857: which means that one can not use two
858: stage scheme to get
859: corrections for the mean number of droplets.
860: The result of the three cycle scheme can be the
861: leading term
862: in the shift of the mean droplet number.
863: So, we have to use
864: the three stage scheme.
865:
866: The effect of compensation in the two
867: stage scheme require to give
868: estimates in a three stage scheme.
869: At first we shall explain the
870: cancellation of effects in the two stage scheme.
871:
872: The number of
873: droplets $N_{tot}$ can be in TAC in the
874: monodisperce approximation calculated as
875: $$
876: N_{tot}^{mean} =
877: \int_{-3}^{\infty} \exp(x - N_{eff}(x+3)^3) dx
878: $$
879: Here $N_{eff}$ is $1/27$.
880:
881: If due to stochastic effects the
882: necessary number $N_{eff}$
883: appeared up to the "moment" $z =
884: -3-\delta$ instead of $z = -3$ then
885: we have to calculate
886: $N_{tot}$ as
887: $$
888: N_{tot} (\delta)=
889: \int_{-3-\delta}^{\infty}
890: \exp(x - N_{eff}(x+3+\delta)^3) dx
891: $$
892: The calculation gives
893: $$
894: N_{tot} (\delta)=
895: \int_{-3}^{\infty}
896: \exp(-\delta) \exp(y - N_{eff}(y+3+\delta)^3) dx
897: $$
898: for
899: $y=x+\delta$
900: and
901: $$
902: N_{tot} (\delta)= <N_{tot}> \exp(-\delta)
903: $$
904:
905:
906: Now we shall establish the distribution
907: $P(\delta)$ of the shift
908: $\delta$. The distribution
909: $P(N_{eff})$ is the ordinary Gausiian
910: distribution
911: $$
912: P(N_{eff}) \sim
913: \exp(-\frac{(N_{eff} - 1/27)^2}{2/27})
914: $$
915: To get $P(\delta)$ we use
916: $$
917: P(N_{eff}) d N_{eff} =
918: P(\delta) d \delta
919: $$
920: The derivative
921: $ d N_{eff} / d \delta$ is
922: $$
923: \frac{ d N_{eff} }{ d \delta} =
924: \exp(\delta)
925: $$
926: Then
927: $$
928: P(\delta) = P(N_{eff}) \exp(\delta)
929: $$
930: The second factor completely compensates
931: the shift in the total
932: number of droplets. Really,
933: $$
934: <N_{tot}> =
935: \int P(\delta) N_{tot}(\delta) d\delta =
936: N_{tot}^{mean}
937: $$
938:
939:
940: This compensation shows the zero
941: effect in the shift of droplets number
942: in the two cycle scheme and requires to consider
943: the three stage scheme.
944:
945:
946:
947:
948:
949: Consider the three stage scheme qualitatively.
950: We have to mention
951: that the value $N_{eff}$ doesn't purely appear
952: under the ideal
953: conditions. Already at $z = -3$
954: the small part of substance is in
955: the droplets. The main consumers of vapor
956: at $z = -3 $ are the
957: droplets appeared at $z = -6$.
958: Here we can use also the modisperce
959: approximation and present $g$ at $z=-3$ as
960: $$
961: g(z=-3) =
962: N_{init} (z +6)^3
963: $$
964: with parameter $N_{init}$ of
965: initial monodisperce approximation.
966:
967:
968: Since the stochastic number $\hat{N}_{init}$
969: doesn't coincide with
970: the value $\bar{N}_{init}$ calculated in TAC
971: we can see the deviation of stochastic value
972: $\hat{g}(z=-3)$ from
973: the value $\bar{g}(z=-3)$
974: calculated in TAC.
975:
976: It seems that we come to the
977: situation which has been already
978: described in the two stage scheme.
979: But now we don't observe the
980: effect of compensation because this effect
981: takes place only due to
982: the integration in the infinite limits.
983: But here such an
984: integration
985: is absent - moreover we need the effect up to
986: the
987: fixed moment $z=-3$. So, we shall see the effect
988: which results in
989: the difference of the mean value $<g(z=-3)>$
990: from $\bar{g}(z=-3)$.
991: Then we
992: see the regular shift $\delta z $ of the moment until
993: which the
994: number of droplets $N_0$ appears. This regular shift
995: leads to the regular
996: shift in the total number of droplets.
997:
998:
999: Now we fulfill
1000: the computations. The number of
1001: droplets formed until $z_l = -3$ in TAC is
1002: $$
1003: \bar{N}_{eff} =
1004: \int_{-\infty}^{-3}
1005: \exp(x- k \bar{N}_{init} (x+6)^3) dx
1006: $$
1007: Parameter $k$ has here a role like $c^{-1}$
1008: in the two cycle scheme had.
1009:
1010:
1011: The distribution
1012: $P(\hat{N}_{init})$ of the stochastic
1013: number of initial
1014: droplets $\hat{N}_{init}$ has a normal
1015: Gaussian form
1016: $$
1017: P(\hat{N}_{init})
1018: \sim
1019: \exp(- \frac{(\hat{N}_{init} - \bar{N}_{init})^2}{ 2
1020: \bar{N}_{init} } )
1021: $$
1022: The value of
1023: dispersion here corresponds to the fact that
1024: we have a free stochastic appearing
1025: of droplets.
1026:
1027: Here appeared a
1028: special question whether it is possible to
1029: write the gaussian
1030: distribution for the total number of
1031: events (here it is
1032: the number of appeared droplets). But this
1033: question can solved positively.
1034:
1035:
1036: Then
1037: $$
1038: <\hat{N}_{eff} (z=-3) > =
1039: \int
1040: P(\hat{N}_{init})
1041: \exp(x - k \hat{N}_{init} (x+6)^3 ) dx
1042: $$
1043: Hence
1044: $$
1045: <\hat{N}_{eff} (z=-3) >
1046: \neq
1047: \bar{N}_{eff}
1048: $$
1049:
1050: Then we can calculate the regular shift
1051: $\delta z$
1052: along $z$-axis for
1053: the moment until $\bar{N}_{eff}$
1054: droplets appeared.
1055: For the value of $\delta z$ we get
1056: $$
1057: \delta z =
1058: \frac{
1059: \exp(-3) \frac{\bar{N}_{eff} -
1060: <\hat{N}_{eff}>}{\bar{N}_{eff}}
1061: }
1062: {\exp(x|_{x=-3} -
1063: k \bar{N}_{init} (x|_{x=-3} + 6)^3 ) }
1064: $$
1065:
1066: Denote by $\delta$ the following value
1067: $$
1068: \delta =
1069: \hat{N}_{init} - \bar{N}_{init}
1070: $$
1071: Let us calculate $<\hat{N}_{eff}>$
1072: $$
1073: <\hat{N}_{eff}(z=-3)> =
1074: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
1075: d \delta
1076: \int_{-\infty}^{-3} dx
1077: \frac{\exp(-{\delta^2}{2 \bar{N}_{init}} V^{-1})}
1078: {\sqrt{2 \pi \bar{N}_{init} V^{-1}}}
1079: \exp(x - k (\bar{N}_{init} +\delta ) (x+6)^3 ) V
1080: $$
1081: Recall that $V$ is
1082: the volume of the system and here we
1083: have to introduce it explicitly.
1084:
1085:
1086: We fulfill the calculations and get
1087: $$
1088: <\hat{N}_{eff}(z=-3)> =
1089: $$
1090: $$
1091: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}
1092: d \delta
1093: \int_{-\infty}^{-3} dx
1094: \frac{\exp(-{\delta^2}{2 \bar{N}_{init}} V^{-1})}
1095: {\sqrt{2 \pi \bar{N}_{init} V^{-1}}}
1096: \exp(x - k \bar{N}_{init} (x+6)^3 ) V
1097: ( 1 - k
1098: \delta (x+6)^3 + \frac{k}{2} \delta^2 (x+6)^6 )
1099: $$
1100:
1101: Then the deviation
1102: between $<\hat{N}_{eff}(z=-3)>$ and
1103: $<\bar{N}_{eff}(z=-3)>$ will be
1104: $$
1105: <\hat{N}_{eff}(z=-3)>
1106: - <\bar{N}_{eff}(z=-3)> =
1107: $$
1108: $$
1109: \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}}
1110: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} d y
1111: \int_{-\infty}^{-3} dx
1112: \exp(-y^2)
1113: \exp(x-k \bar{N}_{init} (x+6)^3 )
1114: \frac{k^2}{2} y^2
1115: (x+6)^6 (2 \bar{N}_{init} V)^{-1}
1116: $$
1117:
1118: Since the monodisperce
1119: approximation becomes suitable only
1120: at $z = -6 $ it is more reasonable to write
1121: $$
1122: <\hat{N}_{eff}(z=-3)>
1123: - <\bar{N}_{eff}(z=-3)> =
1124: $$
1125: $$
1126: \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}}
1127: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} d y
1128: \int_{- 6 }^{-3} dx
1129: \exp(-y^2)
1130: \exp(x-k \bar{N}_{init} (x+6)^3 )
1131: \frac{k^2}{2} y^2 (x+6)^6 2 \bar{N}_{init} V^{-1}
1132: $$
1133:
1134:
1135: Then for the average
1136: number of droplets appeared in the
1137: system
1138: $$
1139: <\hat{N}_{eff}(z=-3)> V
1140: = ( \bar{N}_{eff}(z=-3)|_{
1141: \bar{N}_{eff}(z=-3) = \exp(-3)
1142: }
1143: + C_0 V^{-1} )
1144: V
1145: $$
1146: where
1147: $$
1148: C_0 =
1149: \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}}
1150: \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} d y
1151: \int_{- 6 }^{-3} dx
1152: \exp(-y^2)
1153: \exp(x-k \bar{N}_{init} (x+6)^3 )
1154: \frac{k^2}{2} y^2 (x+6)^6 2 \bar{N}_{init}
1155: $$
1156: Here we use
1157: $\bar{N}_{eff}(z=-3) = \exp(-3)$
1158: for the number
1159: of droplets in the unit of the system
1160: because namely this
1161: value corresponds to the characteristic
1162: unperturbed value of droplets and the choice
1163: $$
1164: \bar{N}_{init} = \exp(-6)
1165: $$
1166: which was used in the last formula.
1167:
1168: % fail pp1.for iz "special"
1169:
1170: The numerical calculations gives
1171: the value of shift $\delta z $
1172: $$
1173: \delta z = \frac{C_0}{\exp(-3) V} \approx
1174: \frac{0.01}{V}
1175: $$
1176:
1177: The shift in the total number of droplets
1178: can be easily
1179: calculated since
1180: $$
1181: <N_{tot}> =
1182: \exp(\delta z ) \bar{N}_{tot}
1183: $$
1184: Hence
1185: $$
1186: <N_{tot}> \approx \bar{N}_{tot} (1 + \frac{w}{V})
1187: $$
1188: $$w \sim 0.01$$
1189:
1190: Quite analogously
1191: one can show the smallness of corrections
1192: in a three cycle scheme in the situation of decay.
1193:
1194:
1195:
1196: The result of performed calculations
1197: shows the smallness of
1198: corrections to the
1199: mean value of the total number of
1200: droplets appeared in the processes of
1201: nucleation under the
1202: conditions of decay and
1203: under the smooth behavior of
1204: external conditions.
1205:
1206: Correction terms
1207: calculated by the theoretical derivations
1208: in the three cycle scheme
1209: are so small that they
1210: can not be confirmed both by
1211: numerical simulations and
1212: experimental researches. So,
1213: generally speaking one has to
1214: say that these stochastic
1215: corrections don't appear
1216: in any practically significant
1217: terms of decompositions.
1218:
1219: This result shows that
1220: there is no sense to fulfill the
1221: procedure
1222: of renormalization analogous to that used in
1223: \cite{statiae} in calculation
1224: of dispersion in terms of two
1225: cycle explicit model with a fixed boundary.
1226:
1227:
1228: Estimating the total result we have to stress
1229: that the weak feature
1230: of the presented method is the
1231: approximate knowledge of the
1232: back side of the size spectrum
1233: $\exp(-x^3)$
1234: in decay and $\exp(x - (x+3)^3/3^3)$ in the
1235: smooth variation external conditions.
1236: So, these constructions can not be appreciated
1237: as the concretely determined result.
1238:
1239:
1240: \section{Several first droplets}
1241:
1242: The leading
1243: correction term doesn't depend on the volume of
1244: the system. It means that the deviation
1245: in the mean number of droplets from the
1246: value predicted by TAC doesn't increase with
1247: increase of the volume.
1248: The latter means that namely the first
1249: several droplets are
1250: responsible for initiation of
1251: corrections to the mean value of
1252: droplets. So, now we shall
1253: show how many droplets are
1254: responsible for
1255: these corrections.
1256:
1257: We know that on one hand the Gaussian distribution
1258: can not be applied as
1259: statistics for the first droplets
1260: and on the other hand the
1261: big droplets are extremely
1262: important in kinetics, which
1263: lies in the base of iteration
1264: method. So, it is
1265: reasonable to use the explicit
1266: numerical simulation to see
1267: the role of several first droplets.
1268:
1269:
1270: We start consideration of the role
1271: of several first droplets with
1272: the case of decay. Figure 4 illustrates
1273: the role of the stochastic appearance
1274: of the first droplet in nucleation
1275: kinetics. Here the relative excess of
1276: mean droplets number is shown.
1277:
1278: % file ris4a.mws
1279: \begin{figure}[hgh]
1280:
1281: \includegraphics[angle=270,totalheight=8cm]{fig4a.eps}
1282:
1283: \begin{caption}
1284: {
1285: Relative excess of the mean droplet number.
1286: Situation of decay}
1287: \end{caption}
1288:
1289: \end{figure}
1290:
1291: There
1292: are two
1293: curves, both are functions of the
1294: volume of system $V$. The value of $V$ is
1295: connected with the total number of droplets in TAC
1296: as $ N_{TAC} = 1.28 V$.
1297:
1298: The broken line is the result
1299: of numerical simulation for initial
1300: problem, the smooth line is the result
1301: of solution of the following problem:
1302: The first droplet appears
1303: stochastically and later all other
1304: droplets appear with probability
1305: $$
1306: p dx \sim I (\frac{dt}{dx}) dx
1307: $$
1308: Here $I$ is the rate of nucleation.
1309: So, except the first droplet the
1310: further appearance occurs according
1311: to TAC.
1312:
1313:
1314: One can see the satisfactory coincidence
1315: between the model and the simulation of
1316: initial problem.
1317:
1318:
1319: One has to note that we are interested
1320: in corrections to the droplets number
1321: when they are essential. We are not
1322: interested in the tails of asymptotics.
1323:
1324: The next picture illustrates
1325: the model with two stochastically
1326: appeared droplets. The broken line is
1327: the numerical simulation and the smooth
1328: line is the model with two
1329: stochastically appeared droplets.
1330:
1331: % file ris5a.mws
1332: \begin{figure}[hgh]
1333:
1334: \includegraphics[angle=270,totalheight=8cm]{fig5a.eps}
1335:
1336: \begin{caption}
1337: {
1338: Relative excess of the mean droplet number.
1339: Situation of decay. The model with two stochastically
1340: appeared droplets.}
1341: \end{caption}
1342:
1343: \end{figure}
1344:
1345:
1346: Here the coincidence between the
1347: model and simulation is practically
1348: perfect. But the model with the
1349: first stochastically appeared droplet
1350: is suitable also and due to simplicity has
1351: to be considered as the basic
1352: theoretical model explaining
1353: the corrections to the mean number of droplets.
1354:
1355:
1356: One can also investigate the model with
1357: discrete regular appearance of
1358: droplets. One can adopt that all
1359: droplets appear when
1360: $$
1361: I_{tot} =
1362: \int_0^t I(t') dt'
1363: $$
1364: attain integer values.
1365: In this model one can take that the
1366: first droplet appears stochastically.
1367: Nothing will be changed.
1368:
1369: The results are shown in figure 6.
1370: The axis are the same. One
1371: can see that the lower broken line
1372: which is the result
1373: of the last model has nothing in
1374: common
1375: with the upper line which is the result
1376: of simulation. So, we has to conclude
1377: that the discrete effects don't
1378: manifest themselves in nucleation
1379: kinetics.
1380:
1381: % file ris6a.mws
1382: \begin{figure}[hgh]
1383:
1384: \includegraphics[angle=270,totalheight=8cm]{fig6a.eps}
1385:
1386: \begin{caption}
1387: {
1388: Relative excess of the mean droplet number.
1389: Situation of decay. The discrete model and simulation
1390: of initial problem.}
1391: \end{caption}
1392:
1393: \end{figure}
1394:
1395: One can observe one interesting
1396: feature of kinetics. If in the first
1397: moments of nucleation period the number
1398: of appeared droplets is higher than the
1399: average value then the total number of
1400: droplets will be lower than the average
1401: total value of the droplets number.
1402: This effect will take place at rather
1403: big value of the total number of
1404: droplets. At the small numbers of the
1405: average
1406: total number of droplets the effect
1407: will be the opposite one.
1408:
1409:
1410: Now we shall turn to investigation of
1411: the nucleation under the smooth
1412: external conditions.
1413:
1414:
1415: Figure 7 shows results of regular continuous
1416: solutions with several
1417: first droplets born stochastically. There
1418: are three curves drawn in this figure.
1419: The oscillating curve is numerical
1420: solution,
1421: two smooth curves are approximations with
1422: the only first
1423: droplet born stochastically
1424: and with the first two droplets born
1425: stochastically.
1426: It is clear that there is no big difference
1427: between these curves.
1428: It means that it is sufficient to
1429: take into account only the
1430: stochastic appearance of the
1431: first droplet.
1432:
1433:
1434:
1435: % fail numdr7.mwz
1436:
1437: \begin{figure}[hgh]
1438:
1439:
1440: \includegraphics[angle=270,totalheight=10cm]{numdr7.eps}
1441:
1442: \begin{caption}
1443: {
1444: Numerical
1445: solution and stochastic approximations at small $V$.
1446: Smooth external conditions.
1447: }
1448: \end{caption}
1449: \end{figure}
1450:
1451: We see that the coincidence is rather satisfactory.
1452:
1453:
1454:
1455:
1456: Now we shall see how one can incorporate the
1457: discrete
1458: effects in this situations.
1459: We propose the following model.
1460: The first droplet
1461: appears stochastically and later
1462: droplets can
1463: appear only after the elementary fixed
1464: intervals.
1465: Every interval is
1466: chosen to have the integral of the rate
1467: of nucleation over
1468: time equal to $V^{-1}$. The
1469: vapor is consumed
1470: by the finite (big) number
1471: of droplets born in the
1472: mentioned moments of time and growing
1473: regularly.
1474: The result at small $V$ is shown in
1475: Figure 8.
1476:
1477:
1478: % fail numdr9.mwz
1479:
1480: \begin{figure}[hgh]
1481:
1482:
1483: \includegraphics[angle=270,totalheight=10cm]{numdr9.eps}
1484:
1485: \begin{caption}
1486: {
1487: Numerical solution and stochastic
1488: discrete approximation at small $V$.
1489: }
1490: \end{caption}
1491: \end{figure}
1492:
1493:
1494:
1495:
1496:
1497: We see that the
1498: coincidence is satisfactory. May be it is
1499: even better than the
1500: result of the regular continuous model
1501: with a first stochastically
1502: appeared droplet. In any case
1503: we see that the stochastic appearance of the
1504: first stochastically droplet
1505: diminishes the role of
1506: discrete effects.
1507:
1508:
1509: One can see that the deviation between discrete and
1510: continuous models is
1511: not big, moreover we see that the role
1512: of discrete
1513: effects is not essential in the deviation of the
1514: average number of droplets.
1515:
1516:
1517:
1518: In this point the nucleation under
1519: conditions of decay differs from the
1520: nucleation under the smooth behavior of
1521: external conditions.
1522:
1523: The main result of
1524: performed simulations is that the
1525: stochastic deviation of
1526: mean value of droplets is mainly
1527: caused by the stochastic
1528: appearance of the first droplet.
1529: The stochastic appearance of the
1530: first droplet is very
1531: simple to calculate analytically.
1532: Really, we have to write the Poisson
1533: distribution for the
1534: probability of appearance of the first
1535: droplet
1536: $$
1537: P \sim \exp(-l)
1538: $$
1539: or more concretely for staying
1540: without appearance of any droplet.
1541: Here $l$ is the number of
1542: possible events. Now we have
1543: to come from $l$ to the time $t$.
1544: This connection is given by
1545: $$
1546: l = \exp(t)
1547: $$
1548: in appropriate renormalization
1549: of time $t$. Certainly this
1550: connection corresponds
1551: to the linearization of ideal
1552: supersaturation
1553: (see \cite{PhysRevE94})
1554: and the ideal rate of nucleation will be
1555: like $\exp(x)$.
1556: Until the
1557: appearance of the first
1558: droplet the supersaturation is
1559: certainly the ideal one.
1560: Then it is easy to get the
1561: differential distribution $p$
1562: over $t$ as
1563: $$
1564: p dt = P dl
1565: $$
1566: Then
1567: $$
1568: p = \exp(t) \exp(-l) = \exp(t - \exp(t))
1569: $$
1570:
1571: It is remarkable that the
1572: last distribution is the same as
1573: the universal distribution of droplets in TAC
1574: established in \cite{TMF}.
1575:
1576:
1577: One can write the Poisson distribution
1578: for the appearance of
1579: the first droplet
1580: $p_1 \sim l^1 \exp(-l)$, for appearance of the
1581: first two droplets
1582: $p_2 \sim l^2 \exp(-l)/2$, for
1583: appearance of $n$
1584: droplets $p_n \sim l^n \exp(-l) / n!$, etc.
1585: When $n \ll N_{tot}$
1586: one can use $l=\exp(t)$ to
1587: recalculate $p(t)$ on the base
1588: of $P(l)$. This restriction isn't essential because
1589: at least
1590: $N_{eff} \ll N_{tot}$ and one needs $n < N_{eff}$.
1591:
1592:
1593: The effects of
1594: discrete model can be also described
1595: analytically. It is
1596: simply necessary to substitute in TAC
1597: the integral by the sum.
1598: One can act in two ways.
1599:
1600: The first possibility is to
1601: take explicitly
1602: into account
1603: several first droplets (let it be $K$). Then
1604: the number of droplets in a liquid phase will be
1605: $$
1606: g = \sum_i^K (z-x_i)^3 +
1607: f_* \int_{z_c}^{z} (z-x)^3 \exp(x-g(x)) dz
1608: $$
1609: where $f_*$ is the "amplitude of spectrum"
1610: (see \cite{Novosib}) and $z_i
1611: \equiv x_i $ are determined by
1612: $$
1613: f_* \int_{-\infty}^{z_i}
1614: \exp(x)dx \equiv \exp(z_i) = (i+0.5)
1615: $$
1616: and
1617: $$
1618: f_* \int_{-\infty}^{z_c}
1619: \exp(x)dx \equiv \exp(z_c) = (i+1)
1620: $$
1621:
1622: Then the methods of solution
1623: are quite analogous to
1624: \cite{Novosib}.
1625:
1626: Another possibility is to use
1627: the Euler-McLorrain decomposition
1628: for
1629: $$
1630: \sum_{i=1}^K z_i - \int_{-\infty}^{z_c} \exp(x) dx
1631: $$
1632: This approach leads to Bernoulli numbers and
1633: will be published separately.
1634:
1635: Also one can use use discrete approximation for all
1636: droplets and replace
1637: it by the integral with the help of
1638: the
1639: global
1640: Euler-McLorrain decomposition.
1641:
1642:
1643: \section{Concluding remarks}
1644:
1645: Generally speaking the
1646: most important result of the
1647: given consideration is the
1648: zero correction in the main
1649: term of the shift of the mean
1650: droplets number. The consequence
1651: is the conclusion that
1652: only several few droplets are
1653: responsible for corrections
1654: in the mean number of droplets.
1655: The fact that only several
1656: first droplets form correction in the
1657: total number of
1658: droplets is rather important for
1659: applicability of proposed
1660: method to calculate corrections.
1661: The use of monodisperce
1662: approximation with a fixed boundary is
1663: possible only in the
1664: case when the first correction term is
1665: the zero one and the
1666: first nonzero term corresponds to the
1667: finite (independent
1668: on $V$) absolute shift in the number of
1669: droplets. Only then
1670: the shift is initiated by
1671: several first droplets and there
1672: is no difference whether we take
1673: into account the rest
1674: droplets in the monodisperce peak or not.
1675: One can note
1676: that the difference between the fixed
1677: boundary and the
1678: floating boundary is reduced only
1679: into account of the rest
1680: droplets. So, there is no difference
1681: what type of boundary
1682: is used (this isn't true for other
1683: characteristics like
1684: dispersion).
1685:
1686: Nevertheless we shall give the corresponding
1687: derivation in
1688: frames of floating boundary.
1689: This is done to show the role of
1690: non-gaussian effects (the
1691: distribution isn't the gaussian one).
1692: Having written the expression
1693: for $<N_{tot}>$
1694: $$
1695: <N_{tot}>
1696: =
1697: \frac{\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dy
1698: \int_{-3+ y}^{\infty} dx
1699: \exp(x-\frac{1}{27} (x - (3+y))^3 ) dx P(y)}
1700: {
1701: \int_{-3+ y}^{\infty} dx
1702: \exp(x-\frac{1}{27} (x - (3+y))^3 ) dx }
1703: $$
1704: where $y$ is the shift and $P(y)$ is the partial
1705: distribution over coordinate $y$,
1706: one can get corrections for $<N_{tot}>$.
1707:
1708:
1709: For the partial distribution $p(y)$ one can write
1710: $$
1711: p(y) dy = P(N) dN
1712: $$
1713: where $P(N)$ is the
1714: partial distribution over possible
1715: droplets $N$.
1716: Having
1717: written
1718: $$
1719: dN /dy = d\exp(N) / dy = \exp(N)
1720: $$
1721: one can get
1722: $P(N)$.
1723: For $P(N)$ one can write the ordinary gaussian
1724: distribution
1725: $$
1726: P(N) \sim
1727: \exp(-\frac{(N-<N>)^2}{2<N>} )
1728: $$
1729: After transformations we see that
1730: $$
1731: P(N) =
1732: \exp(-\frac{(\exp(-3-y)-\exp(-3))^2}{2\exp(-3)} )
1733: $$
1734: or
1735: $$
1736: P(N) =\exp(-\frac{\exp(-6)
1737: (\exp(-y)-1)^2}{2\exp(-3)} )
1738: $$
1739: Having fulfill decompositions we get
1740: $$
1741: P(N) =\exp(-\frac{\exp(-6)
1742: (1-y+y^2/2+ ... -1)^2}{2\exp(-3)} )
1743: $$
1744: and with restriction of first terms
1745: $$
1746: P(N) =\exp(-\frac{\exp(-6)
1747: (y-y^2/2)^2}{2\exp(-3)} )
1748: $$
1749: or finally
1750: $$
1751: P(N) =\exp(-\frac{\exp(-6)
1752: y^2}{2\exp(-3)} )
1753: \exp(-\frac{\exp(-6)
1754: y^3}{2\exp(-3)} )
1755: $$
1756: Having extracted Gaussian distribution we get
1757: $$
1758: P(N) =\exp(-\frac{\exp(-6)
1759: y^2}{2\exp(-3)} )
1760: (1-\frac{\exp(-6)
1761: y^3}{2\exp(-3)} + ...)
1762: $$
1763: So, there appear the non-gaussian corrections.
1764: Namely these corrections are
1765: the reason of appearance of
1766: corrections in the total number of droplets.
1767: They can be easily
1768: calculated by the manner described in
1769: calculations in the model with a fixed boundary.
1770:
1771: Here we shall stop our
1772: calculations and put a question what
1773: distribution has
1774: to be a gaussian one: the distribution
1775: $P(N)$ or the distribution $P(y)$?
1776: Certainly there
1777: is no clear answer on this question.
1778: Moreover the
1779: results of \cite{statiae} shows that there
1780: is a real difference
1781: when gaussian distribution instead of
1782: the
1783: Poisson distribution is used.
1784: Here it is clear that we
1785: have to use the Poisson distribution.
1786: But then to fulfill the integration
1787: one has to use the steepens
1788: descent method which is equivalent to the use of
1789: the gaussian
1790: distribution with corresponding corrections.
1791:
1792:
1793: So we came to a paradox and
1794: it can not be resolved without
1795: taking into account that several first
1796: droplets are the
1797: reason of the shift of the mean number of droplets.
1798: Fortunately, there is
1799: no need to continue this procedure
1800: and one can take into
1801: account the influence of several first
1802: droplets
1803: explicitly by the procedure described above.
1804:
1805: In investigation of the
1806: shift to the droplets number one has
1807: to take into account
1808: that the asymptotic we need is the
1809: "intermediate asymptotic".
1810: There is no necessity to know
1811: for example that instead
1812: of $10000$ there will be $10005$
1813: droplets. We need the
1814: shift where it is at least few
1815: percent.
1816: So, we need asymptotics at the intermediate mean
1817: number of droplets.
1818: Namely this case was investigated and
1819: it was shown that already account of two or
1820: three first droplets
1821: is
1822: sufficient for the true shift of the
1823: droplets number.
1824:
1825:
1826:
1827: We have to note that there is another reason of
1828: applicability of
1829: monodisperce approximation with a fixed
1830: boundary. This reason lies in
1831: construction of monodisperce
1832: approximation and it is
1833: different for decay and for smooth
1834: variation of
1835: external conditions. For the situation with
1836: the smooth variation of
1837: external conditions one can note
1838: that the
1839: amplitude $\exp(-3)$ corresponding to the moment
1840: of
1841: formation of monodisperce peak is very small. So, the
1842: value $y \exp(-3)$ will be
1843: small. Then we can neglect
1844: $y$ in the
1845: lower boundary of integration and come to the
1846: approximation with a
1847: fixed boundary instead of approximation
1848: with a floating boundary.
1849: So, the smallness of $\exp(-3)$ is the
1850: reason why one can
1851: use approximation with a fixed boundary.
1852:
1853: In the situation of
1854: decay there is no such smallness of
1855: amplitude. But one can recall that
1856: the shift of monodisperce
1857: approximation (i.e. the
1858: position of peak formation) was chosen
1859: in such a way that "the length" of
1860: peak corresponds to the
1861: extremum of droplets
1862: number (see \cite{Decaydispersion}).
1863: So, the derivative of
1864: the total number of
1865: droplets over the
1866: length of
1867: spectrum is zero and there is no difference
1868: whether to use the
1869: fixed boundary or to use the floating
1870: boundary.
1871: Here appears the physical reason of the choice
1872: of monodisperce
1873: approximation in a way prescribed in
1874: \cite{Decaydispersion}.
1875: Certainly neither the approximation
1876: of fixed boundary nor
1877: approximation of floating boundary
1878: reflect the right
1879: physical evolution but such a choice of
1880: monodisperce approximation
1881: allows to ignore this problem.
1882:
1883: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1884:
1885: \bibitem{PhysicaA}
1886: Kurasov V.B., Physica A 226 (1996) 117
1887:
1888:
1889:
1890: \bibitem{Novosib}
1891: Kuni F.M., Grinin A.P., Kurasov V.B.,
1892: Heterogeneous nucleation in
1893: vapor flow, In:
1894: Mechanics of unhomogenenous systems, Ed. by
1895: G.Gadiyak, Novosibirsk, 1985, p. 86
1896: (in Russian)
1897:
1898: \bibitem{TMF} V.B. Kurasov
1899: Universality in kinetics of the first
1900: order phase transitions, SPb, 1997, 400 p. (in English)
1901:
1902:
1903: \bibitem{PhysRevE94}
1904: Kurasov V. Phys. Rev. E, vol. 49, p. 3948 (1994)
1905:
1906:
1907: \bibitem{Koll}
1908: Grinin A.P., F.M.Kuni,
1909: A.V. Karachencev, A.M.Sveshnikov
1910: Kolloidn. journ. (Russia) vol.62 N 1 (2000), p.
1911: 39-46 (in russian)
1912:
1913: \bibitem{Vest}
1914: Grinin A.P., A.V. Karachencev, Ae. A. Iafiasov
1915: Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta
1916: (Scientific journal of St.Petersburg university)
1917: Series 4, 1998, issue 4 (N 25) p.13-18
1918: (in russian)
1919:
1920:
1921: \bibitem{Kolldyn}
1922: Grinin A.P., Kuni F.M., Sveshnikov A.M.
1923: %Statistika processa bykleacii
1924: % v usloviah pospennogo sozdania peresushenia para
1925: Koll. Journ., 2001, volume 63, N6, p.747-754
1926:
1927:
1928:
1929: \bibitem{Monodec}
1930:
1931: Kurasov V.B., Deponed in VINITI
1932: Manuscript 2594B95 from 19.09.95, 28p.
1933:
1934:
1935: \bibitem{Decaydispersion}
1936: Kurasov V., Preprint cond-mat@xxx.lanl.gov
1937: get 0410774
1938:
1939: \bibitem{Monodyn}
1940: Kurasov V., Preprint cond-mat2xxx.lanl.gov
1941: get 0410043
1942:
1943: \bibitem{statiae}
1944: Kurasov V., Preprint cond-mat@xxx.lanl.gov
1945: get 0410616
1946:
1947: \bibitem{floatingdindisp}
1948: Kurasov V., Preprint cond-mat@xxx.lanl.gov
1949: get 0412141
1950:
1951: \end{thebibliography}
1952:
1953:
1954: \end{document}
1955: