Aliotta F, Gapiński J, Pochylski M, Ponterio R C, Saija F, Vasi C
CNR-IPCF, Laboratorio di Tecniche Spettroscopiche, Messina, Italy.
Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2011 Nov;84(5 Pt 1):051202. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.84.051202. Epub 2011 Nov 10.
The most familiar approaches used to describe the dynamical structure factor from adiabatic density fluctuations in liquids are based on generalized hydrodynamics and on the memory function, respectively. We show that, contrary to the common belief, the two approaches are not fully equivalent. In particular, models based on the memory function of a normalized damped oscillator fail in reproducing the correct experimental spectral profiles of systems close to the relaxation process. The discrepancy is due to misleading interpretation of the theoretical memory-function expressions, producing an unavoidable mixing of spectral contribution at different wave vectors when the theory is forced beyond its limits of validity.
用于描述液体中绝热密度涨落的动态结构因子的最常见方法分别基于广义流体动力学和记忆函数。我们表明,与普遍看法相反,这两种方法并不完全等效。特别是,基于归一化阻尼振子记忆函数的模型无法再现接近弛豫过程的系统的正确实验光谱轮廓。这种差异是由于对理论记忆函数表达式的误导性解释,当理论超出其有效性极限时,会不可避免地产生不同波矢处光谱贡献的混合。