home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Troubleshooting Netware Systems
/
CSTRIAL0196.BIN
/
attach
/
pcc
/
v08n06
/
chemist.exe
/
TEDDEMO2.EXE
/
SKALSKY.TEX
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1990-03-28
|
22KB
|
472 lines
% (fh)--------------------------------------------= ii.tex =--
%
% This file was
% written in TU Budapest QTG by= Varga Imre at= 10-05-89 11:14
%
% modified in TU Budapest QTG by= Márk Géza at= 11-05-89 21:19
%
% (fh)----------------------------------------------------------------
%
% Pál Pacher, Géza Márk, László Udvardi and Imre Varga:
% Teaching Physics by Means of Computer Modeling,
% Eighth Summer School on Computing Techniques in Physics,
% Skalsky dvur, Czechoslovakia, September 1989
% Proceedings editor: J. Nadrchal, Institute of Physics Praha
%
\magnification=1200
%\nopagenumber
\hsize=15truecm
\vsize=22.0truecm
\baselineskip=0.90truecm plus 0.1truecm
\parindent=1truecm
\centerline {\bf TEACHING PHYSICS BY MEANS OF COMPUTER MODELING}
\vskip 0.2truein
\centerline {P\'al Pacher$^{\dagger }$,
G\'eza M\'ark$^{\ast\ddagger}$,
L\'aszl\'o Udvardi$^{\star }$ and Imre Varga$^{\star }$}
\vskip 0.2truein
\centerline {\it $^{\dagger }$Department of Physics, $^{\ast }$
Department of Atomic Physics,}
\centerline {\it $^{\star }$Quantum Theory Group,}
\centerline {\it Institute of Physics, Technical University, 1521
Budapest, Hungary.}
\vskip 0.4truein
\noindent {\bf Abstract}
\vskip 0.3truein
Computer modeling in teaching physics has a growing importance. It
helps to solve and understand complex physical problems using
numerical methods, computer simulation and animation. Typical
examples developed in our institute are presented: the 3--body
problem, the Van der Pol oscillator, the recursive graphs and the
problem of the ideal gas simulation. Both the numerical and the
modeling difficulties are discussed.
\vskip 3truecm
\noindent $^{\ddagger }$proofs should be sent to this author.
\vfill
\eject
\vskip 0.4truein
\noindent {\bf 1. Introduction}
\vskip 0.3truein
Traditionally physics is divided into two main branches:
experimental and theoretical physics.
The experimental physicist tries to understand nature by
performing experiments on some representative samples. He records
sample properties which can be precisely measured against
variables under his control. In order to understand his results
and to generalize them to other samples he needs the help of a
theoretician.
The theoretical physicist is not interested in the irrelevant
details of the experimentalist's samples. By assuming a theory for
the behavior of real materials, he works out those same properties
the experimentalists had measured as exactly as possible.
But some properties of the sample might be easy to measure, but
too difficult for the theoretical physicist to evaluate without
unreasonable approximations. In other cases theories predict
interesting consequences that are impossible, or at least very
hard, to measure.
In both cases a product of our age, {\it computer modeling}, can
help in solving the problem. The computational physicist uses a
finite size model, which is a compromise between the accuracy of
his model and the size of available computer storage and computer
time. He runs the model and makes ''measurements'' on it.
These results can be compared with the experiments (if there are
any), or they themselves are data to compare with theoretical
predictions. In contemporary physics a number of subjects rely
more and more on computational physics.
Computer modeling is, of course, not less important in teaching
physics. Computer models operating within the framework of
classical physics can show the students a close-up picture of
materials. They can reveal why we see various sample-averaged
properties measured by experiments or calculated by theory.
Maxwell invented a ''demon'' who could watch the atoms going by.
Nowadays students can observe the motion of particles on the
screen of a PC and can open or close the shutter to
separate atoms with different velocities or other properties and
follow the entropy change of the process.
At the Faculty of Electrical Engineering of the
Technical University
Budapest a new branch, Computer Engineering, has been brought to
light two years ago. In the third semester the students have to
write a complex program for practicing the computer languages they
have already learned, such as Pascal and C. Many students solve
different problems in physics, most of them by computer modeling.
Besides developing skills, it also helps them to understand how
nature works. In what follows we describe some of these programs
written for IBM compatible PC-s.
\vskip 0.4truein
\noindent {\bf 2. Moons of Saturn}
\vskip 0.3truein
The simulation of three--body problems is always a big challenge.
This time the task was the simulation of the motion of the
co-orbital moons of Saturn discovered by Voyager 1 [1]. These
moons of approximately the same size and mass follow the same
orbit with slightly different distance from Saturn. The inner moon
revolves obviously a bit faster than the outer one. Due to the
gravitational attraction between the two moons, however, they
never collide but exchange their orbits when they are close
enough. The aim of the simulation was to show that the minimum
distance of the two moons is nonzero.
For the integration of the Newtonian equations, we have used the
energy conserving algorithm by Greenspan [2]. The algorithm
involves the solution of the Newtonian equations of motion for the
interaction
$$F=-{{G}\over {r}}+{{H}\over {r^n}}-\alpha v,$$
where the dominant part is the attraction and the repulsive and
the friction terms are present in order to balance the instability
problems arising for taking nonzero timesteps. We have chosen
$G=2250$, $H=1$, $n=3$, $\alpha =10^{-6}$ taken from [2]. We have
found that Greenspan's algorithm was faster than usual integration
procedures but the accuracy was considerably lower. The fine
tuning of the parameters appearing in the force formula may,
however, improve the results.
As it is shown on Figure 1. the simulation has yielded the
expected answer: the two moons under consideration never collide
but approach each other to about $21.5\% $ of their largest
separation. If we chose $H=0$ we may obtain
approximatelly the same answer.
\vskip 0.4truein
\noindent {\bf 3. Van der Pol oscillator}
\vskip 0.3truein
The solution of several physical problems, like the three--body
problem in classical physics or the problem of
turbulence, exhibits chaotic properties. One of the historically
most important example is the Van der Pol oscillator. It was the
first system in which the existence of chaotic solutions could be
proved [3]. The study of the Van der Pol oscillator had
considerable contribution to the evolution of the theory of
dynamical systems [4].
We made the oscillator be chaotic using a tunnel diode having
nonlinear U--I characteristic. See Figure 2.
A set of coupled ordinary differential equations may
be derived describing this oscillator [5], where a nonlinear
function represents the characteristics of a tunnel diode
appearing in the circuit.
$$L{{dI}\over {dt}} = {{MS-RC}\over {C}}I + U - V,$$
$${{dU}\over {dt}} = -{I\over C},$$
$$C_1{{dV}\over {dt}} = I - f(V),$$
where function $f(V)$ was chosen as
$$f(V) =\cases {\alpha (e^{\gamma V}-1), &if $V \leq 0,$ \cr \cr
aV^3+bV^2+cV, &if $0 < V \leq V_0,$ \cr \cr
e^{\beta (V-V_0)}+d, &if $V > V_0$,}$$
where the parameters were chosen requiring the existence of the
first derivative of the function $f(V)$: $\alpha =0.0945A$,
$\gamma =100V^{-1}$, $a=56.688AV^{-3}$, $b=-53.072AV^{-2}$,
$c=9.45AV^{-1}$, $\beta = 2.7945V^{-1}$, $V_0=0.787V$, and
$d = 0.78769A$. In order to solve the set of differential
equations
a third order Runge--Kutta procedure using analytical derivatives
was applied. The waveform of the solutions and the strange
attractor of the system were determined changing the parameters of
the oscillator. As one can see on Figure 3. the attractor of the
system tends to a limitcycle for the following set of parameters
$$g = {{U}\over {I_m}}\sqrt{{{C}\over{L}}} = 0.05, \qquad
{{C}\over {C_1}}g = 0.02, \qquad {{MS-RC}\over {\sqrt{LC}}} =
0.1.$$
\vfill \eject
\vskip 0.4truein
\noindent {\bf 4. Fractal dimension}
\vskip 0.3truein
Computer modeling is essential in teaching the behavior of
nonlinear systems. One of the most interesting features
in such systems is the appearance of fractals, which has also been
discovered in many other fields of life. Fractals happen to be one
of the most complicated and yet one of the most beautiful
mathematical objects as anyone can verify it from the wonderful
pictures in Mandelbrot's [6] famous book.
The fractal dimension describes the volumetric structure of any
set of points distributed in real space. It may be used to
characterize special graphs, strange attractors, i.e. fractals in
general.
In this program two dimensional recursive graphs have been generated:
the Sierpinsky carpet, the Sierpinsky graph, the
Hamilton graph, and the Bethe lattice (see Figure 4.). The fractal
dimension of these graphs have been calculated by means of the
basic definition introduced by Hausdorff and Kolmogorov [6]
$$d=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}{{\log (P(n))}\over {-\log(\epsilon
(n))}},$$
where $n$ is the fractal index, $P(n)$ is the number of squares
necessary to cover the $n$-th fractal and $\epsilon (n)=0.5^n$
is the length of the sides of these squares. Convergence based on
the definition was fairly slow and the generation of the recursive
graphs is also a computer consuming task. We have found
$d=\log (3)/\log (2)$ for the Sierpinski carpet, $d=2$ for the
Sierpinski graph and the Hamilton graph, and $d=1$ for the Bethe
lattice.
\vfill \eject
\vskip 0.4truein
\noindent {\bf 5. Ideal Gas Simulation [7]}
\vskip 0.3truein
Statistical physics is a profitable field for computer
modeling.
Here one always studies a system consisting of
many particles.
In a computer model the microscopic -
macroscopic metamorphosis is witnessed, i.e., the multi-faced
behavior of the system is built up by the motion of several
particles governed by simple laws.
The statistical physical simulation methods are
classified as {\it Monte-Carlo} [8] or {\it molecular
dynamics } [9,10,11,12,14] techniques. The Monte-Carlo
calculations are usually faster but the moves of the
particles are artificial rather than dynamical. For this
reason only the equilibrium properties can be calculated.
In this section we present an ideal gas model based on
molecular dynamics. The modelled objects are mass points and
a container made up from various types of walls. The
particles playing the role of gas molecules collide
elastically with each other. The different interactions
modellized by the different walls are represented by the
corresponding rules for collision against the walls.
This program
is useful as a visual aid and experimental tool
in various levels of education including the following
topics:
molecular motion, temperature, first and
second laws of thermodynamics, speed distribution, fluctuations [13],
molecule formation, relaxation phenomena.
The program displays on the screen the moving particles
confined to a rectangular vessel and
three real time diagrams
(G1, G2, G3) simultaneously. See Figure 5.
There are three types of particles: red, green
and invisible ones. The invisible particles are useful when
you want to concentrate just to certain molecules. (E.g.
in simulation of gas mixing, see later). Just make those
molecules visible and the others invisible!
The particle number and the mass of each particle type can
be chosen
independently. The maximal number of the particles is at
most 999.
The types of the walls are:
- adiabatic: i.e. the particles collide elastically against
it,
- diathermic: it can exchange energy both with the
particles and with the heat reservoir.
The walls can move along the normal or the tangential
direction to their surface.
Moreover, a {\it separation wall} can be placed into the
container. There is a {\it slit} on this wall, the user can
open or close this slit or put a {\it Maxwell's demon} into the
slit.
The on-line diagrams can show a variety of distribution
functions (e.g. pressure, density, temperature versus position,
histograms of velocity and energy), time-evolution
functions (e.g.
entropy). Time averaged distribution functions
may be displayed, as well.
Other possible useful features are the {\it shot noise}
(a clack in every wall-particle collision) and
{\it particle tracing}
which shows the path of one particular mass point.
\vskip 0.2truein
\noindent{\it 5.1. Free Expansion of the Gas Into Vacuum}
\vskip 0.1truein
The particles start from the upper left corner into
different directions with uniform speed distribution.
The container is quickly filled up by the particles.
The velocities will be changed by the collisions and one
arrives to the Maxwell velocity distribution. Its form in two
dimensions is given by: $ F(v) = A v e ^ { - v^2 / v_0^2 } $.
If the collisions of particles with each other are
switched off
the velocity
distribution is kept in its initial form in case of
adiabatic boundaries.
When at least one
boundary is diathermic, however, the energy distribution of
the gas converges to the energy distribution of the
reservoir.
\vskip 0.2truein
\noindent{\it 5.2. Mixing of Two Types of Particles}
\vskip 0.1truein
The green particles start from the upper left corner, the red
ones start from the opposite corner. The initial
velocity and the mass of both types may be chosen
independently. A separation wall with a hole may be
placed into the container with selectable location and hole size.
By displaying the velocity distribution in G1 and the
time-temperature
functions of the two types of particles in G2 and G3
the thermalization of the system [16]
may be observed, i.e. the
average energy for both types of particles will be the same.
If the
greens' mass is greater than the reds' mass, the greens' average
velocity will be smaller yielding a two peaked
velocity distribution (see Figure 5).
The role of a Maxwell's demon may be played when
opening or closing the hole on the wall, i.e. the particles may be
separated to the left and right side of the container according
to some attribute (e.q. color, speed).
\vskip 0.2truein
\noindent{\it 5.3. Boltzmann Distribution}
\vskip 0.1truein
Let's switch the gravitational field on!
If collisions are allowed only against the walls the particles
move along independent parabolic paths. If they start
with the same speed each particle reaches the same maximal
height, above that height one gets vacuum. This strange picture
is dramatically changed when mutual collisions are permitted.
Energetic particles reach high elevations while slow particles
bounce just on the floor. The particle density versus height
may be checked and it proves to be similar to the theoretical
exponential curve. When for the two types of particles different
masses are chosen, the lighter ones reach higher elevations due to
their larger average velocity.
\vskip 0.2truein
\noindent{\it 5.4. Maxwell's Demon}
\vskip 0.1truein
The demon is sitting in the hole of the separation wall
dividing the container into two parts. She lets pass
particles coming from the left through the hole only if their
energy is greater than a preselected threshold.
Particles coming from the right are let through only with
energy smaller than the threshold.
When the threshold energy is zero the demon
operates as a pump. The particles starting from the upper left
corner first uniformly fill both sides of the vessel then the
demon slowly pumps them to the right side. This strange process
is shown in Figure 6.
\vskip 0.2truein
\noindent{\it 5.5. Motion of a Piston}
\vskip 0.1truein
The right wall is pushed into the container then pulled
out again. The compression rate and the velocity of the
piston may be selected. Particles colliding against the moving
piston change their energy leading to heating or cooling the
gas. The process is adiabatic, because there is no heat transfer,
just mechanical work is done.
How much work is done by a given compression? That depends
on the velocity of the piston as it may be demonstrated by
plotting the average temperature versus time. Maximal work is
done by slow, quasistatic piston motion - one arrives to the
law [15] $pV^{\kappa} = const$. The work is almost zero if you
pull out quickly the piston, because just only a few particles
hit the piston during its motion. In this case the process is
isothermic, i.e. $pV = const.$
\vfill
\eject
\noindent {\bf References}
\vskip .1truein
\parindent -0.20truecm
\baselineskip=0.80truecm plus 0.1truecm
1\ R. Gore, National Geographic {\bf 160} (1984) 3
2\ D. Greenspan, SIAM J. Appl. Math. {\bf 20} (1971) 67
3\ M. L. Cartwright, J. E. Littlewood and J. London, Mat. Soc.
{\bf 20} (1945) 180
4\ N. Levinson, Ann. Math. {\bf 50} (1949) 127; S. Smale, Bull.
Am. Math. Soc. {\bf 73} (1967) 747; G. Guckenheimer, Physica
{\bf 1D} (1980) 227
5\ A. S. Pikovsky and M. I. Robinovich, Physica {\bf 2D} (1981) 8
6\ B. Mandelbrot, {\it Fractals: Form, Chance and Dimension} (W.
H. Freedman, San Francisco, 1977)
7\ E. H. Kennard,
{\it Kinetic Theory of Gases
With an Introduction to Statistical Mechanics
}
(McGraw-Hill, New York, 1938)
8\ J. Novak and A. B. Bortz,
Am. J. Phys. {\bf 38} (1970) 1402
9\ P. Empedocles,
J. Chem. Educ. {\bf 51} (1974) 593
10\ B. J. Adler and T. E. Wainwright,
J. Chem. Phys. {\bf 31} (1959) 459
11\ {\it Kinetic Theory by Computer Animation}, a film
produced by J. T. Fitch, J. L. Kinsey and S. F. Martin.
(Kaima Co., Dept. P 2. Concord, MA 01742.)
\noindent
Reviewed in Am. J. Phys. {\bf 44} (1976) 810
12\ E. T. Lane, {\it Simulated Waves and Paricles}, a program for
APPLE II.C. (CONDUIT RM 4557, Oakdale Hall,
The University of Iowa, Iowa City 52242)
\noindent
This program, however, don't model the mutual collisions of
particles.
13\ J. R. Ray,
Am. J. Phys. {\bf 50} (1982) 1035
14\ T. Tajima, A. Clark, G. G. Craddock, D. L. Gilden,
W. K. Leung, Y. M. Li, J. A. Robertson and
B. J. Saltzman,
Am. J. Phys. {\bf 53} (1985) 365
15\ M. I. Sobel,
Am. J. Phys. {\bf 48} (1980) 877
16\ J. Berger,
Am. J. Phys. {\bf 56} (1988) 923
\vfill
\eject
\noindent {\bf Figure Captions}
\vskip .1truein
\parindent 0truecm
Figure 1. Distance of the moons versus time. $R$ is the average
distance of the moons measured from Saturn. $T$ is the average
time of the orbits of the moons around Saturn. Model parameters
were used [2]. (Mass of Saturn $M=10$, masses of the moons $m=0.01$,
$dt=0.01$, initial distance of the moons from Saturn $R_1=101$
and $R=99$, $T\approx 132.5$.)
\vskip .2truein
Figure 2. Scheme of the oscillator and the V--I model characteristics
of the tunnel diode.
\vskip .2truein
Figure 3. Attractor of the Van der Pol oscillator.
$X = {{I}\over {I_m}}$, $Y = {{U}\over
{I_m}}\sqrt{{{C}\over{L}}}$,$Z = {{V}\over {V_m}}$ \hfill \break
\vskip .2truein
Figure 4. Recursive graphs: {\it a.} Sierpinski carpet, {\it b.}
Sierpinski graph, {\it c.} Hilbert graph, {\it d.} Bethe lattice.
\vskip .2truein
Figure 5. Demonstration of thermal equilibrium and
relaxation. The vessel contains 150 red and 75 green
particles (colors not shown in this figure).
Initially they had different temperatures.
The mass of the green particles is 36 times
greater than the reds' mass yielding a two peaked velocity
distribution shown on G1.
Curves G2 and G3 show the average temperature of the
green and red particles versus time, respectively.
\vskip .2truein
Figure 6. Maxwell's demon in action.
The demon's threshold energy is zero.
G1 shows the entropy of the system, G2 shows the horizontal
density distribution.
\bye