Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The standard 12-6 Lennard Jones potential is given by

$$U(r_ij) = 4\epsilon\left[ \left(\frac{\sigma_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\right)^{12} - \left(\frac{\sigma_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\right)^{6} \right]$$

where $\epsilon$ and $\sigma$ are the parameters.

I am reading a paper (Pohorille, A.; Jarzynski, C.; Chipot, C. J. Phys. Chem. B 2010, 114, 10235-10253), and my mind is very cloudy right now. In the paper, in equation (65) on page 15 (p. 10249), the authors define a so-called soft-core potential by modifying the original Lennard-Jones potential using parameters $\lambda$ and $\alpha$:

$$U(r_{ij}; \lambda) = 4\epsilon\left(1-\lambda\right)^{n}\left\{ \frac{1}{\left[\alpha\lambda^{2}+\left(\frac{\sigma_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\right)^{6}\right]^{2}}-\frac{1}{\alpha\lambda^{2}+\left(\frac{\sigma_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\right)^{6}}\right\} $$

Then the paper says:

... the original Lennard-Jones potential is fully recovered at $\lambda = 0$.

But I think that if I plug $\lambda = 0$ into the equation above, I get:

$$U(r_ij) = 4\epsilon\left[ \left(\frac{r_{ij}}{\sigma_{ij}}\right)^{12} - \left(\frac{r_{ij}}{\sigma_{ij}}\right)^{6} \right]$$

which is not the original Lennard-Jones potential.

Is there something wrong with my reasoning, or is there a typo in the paper?

share|cite|improve this question

You are right, there is most likely a typo in the paper. Presumably they mean $$U(r_{ij}; \lambda) = 4\epsilon\left(1-\lambda\right)^{n}\left\{ \frac{1}{\left[\alpha\lambda^{2}+\left(\frac{r_{ij}}{\sigma_{ij}}\right)^{6}\right]^{2}}-\frac{1}{\alpha\lambda^{2}+\left(\frac{r_{ij}}{\sigma_{ij}}\right)^{6}}\right\}. $$ This is what's given in their reference (Chem. Phys. Lett. 222 no. 6, pp. 529-539 (2010), equation 7, p. 532) except for a reparametrization $\lambda\leftrightarrow(1-\lambda)$.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.