A polymer is a macromolecule, composed of many similar or identical repeated subunits. Polymers are common in, but not limited to, organic media. They range from familiar synthetic plastics to natural biopolymers such as DNA and proteins. Their unique elongated molecular structure produces unique physical properties, including toughness, viscoelasticity, and a tendency to form glasses and semicrystalline structures. The modern concept of polymers as covalently bonded macromolecular structures was proposed in 1920 by Hermann Staudinger.[1] One sub-field in the study of polymers is polymer physics. As a part of soft matter studies, Polymer physics concerns itself with the study of mechanical properties[2] and focuses on the perspective of condensed matter physics.
Because polymers are such large molecules, bordering on the macroscopic scale, their physical properties are usually too complicated for solving using deterministic methods. Therefore, statistical approaches are often implemented to yield pertinent results. The main reason for this relative success is that polymers constructed from a large number of monomers are efficiently described in the thermodynamic limit of infinitely many monomers, although in actuality they are obviously finite in size.
Thermal fluctuations continuously affect the shape of polymers in liquid solutions, and modeling their effect requires using principles from statistical mechanics and dynamics. The path integral approach falls in line with this basic premise and its afforded results are unvaryingly statistical averages. The path integral, when applied to the study of polymers, is essentially a mathematical mechanism to describe, count and statistically weigh all possible spatial configuration a polymer can conform to under well defined potential and temperature circumstances. Employing path integrals, problems hitherto unsolved were successfully worked out: Excluded volume, entanglement, links and knots to name a few.[3] Prominent contributors to the development of the theory include Nobel laureate P.G. de Gennes, Sir Sam Edwards, M.Doi,[4] [5] F.W. Wiegel and H. Kleinert.[6]
Early attempts at path integrals can be traced back to 1918.[7] A sound mathematical formalism wasn't established until 1921.[8] This eventually lead Richard Feynman to construct a formulation for quantum mechanics,[9] now commonly known as Feynman Integrals.In the core of Path integrals lies the concept of Functional integration. Regular integrals consist of a limiting process where a sum of functions is taken over a space of the function's variables. In functional integration the sum of functionals is taken over a space of functions. For each function the functional returns a value to add up. Path integrals should not be confused with line integrals which are regular integrals with the integration evaluated along a curve in the variable's space.Not very surprisingly functional integrals often diverge, therefore to obtain physically meaningful results a quotient of path integrals is taken.
This article will use the notation adopted by Feynman and Hibbs,[10] denoting a path integral as:
\intG[f(x)]l{D}f(x)
with
G[f(x)]
l{D}f(x)
See main article: article and Ideal chain. One extremely naive yet fruitful approach to quantitatively analyze the spatial structure and configuration of a polymer is the free random walk model. The polymer is depicted as a chain of point like unit molecules which are strongly bound by chemical bonds and hence the mutual distance between successive units can be approximated to be constant.In the ideal polymer model the polymer subunits are completely free to rotate with respect to each other, and therefore the process of polymerization can be looked at as a random three dimensional walk, with each monomer added corresponding to another random step of predetermined length. Mathematically this is formalized through the probability function for the position vector of the bonds, i.e. the relative positions of a pair of adjacent units:
\psi(\vecr)=
1 | |
4\pil2 |
\delta(\left|\vecr\right\vert-l)
\delta
l
A second crucial feature of the ideal model is that the bond vectors
\vecrn
\Psi(\left\{\vecrn\right
N | |
\})=\prod | |
n=1 |
\psi(\vecrn)
styleN
stylen
\Psi
\vecrn
Salient results of this model include:
In accordance with the random walk model, the end to end vector average vanishes due to symmetry considerations. Therefore, in order to get an estimate of the polymer size, we turn to the end to end vector variance:
\left\langle\vecR2\right\rangle=Nl2
style\vecR\equiv
N | |
\sum | |
n=1 |
\vecrn
Thus, a first crude approximation for the polymer size is simply
R0\equiv\sqrt{\left\langle\vecR2\right\rangle}=\sqrt{N}l
As mentioned, we are usually interested in statistical features of the polymer configuration. A central quantity will therefore be the end to end vector probability distribution:
\Phi(\vecR,N)=\left(
3 | |
2\piNl2 |
\right
| ||||
) |
\exp\left(-
3\vecR2 | |
2Nl2 |
\right)
Note that the distribution depends only on the end to end vector magnitude. Also, the above expression gives non-zero probability for sizes larger than
Nl
N → infty
Taking the limit of a smooth spatial contour for the polymer conformation, that is, taking the limits
N → infty
l → 0,
Nl=const
\partial\Phi | |
\partialN |
=
l2 | |
6 |
\nabla2\Phi
style\nabla2
\Phi(\vecR,N
\Phi(\vecR,N+\DeltaN).
One might wonder why bother with a differential equation for a function already analytically obtained, but as will be demonstrated, this equation can also be generalized for non-ideal circumstances.
Under the same assumption of a smooth contour, the distribution function can be expressed using a path integral:
\Phi(\vecR,N)=
\vecR,N | |
\int | |
0,0 |
\exp\left\{
N | |
-\int | |
0 |
L0d\nu\right\}l{D}\vecR(\nu)
Where we defined
styleL0=
3 | |
2l2 |
\left(
d\vecR | |
d\nu |
\right)2.
Here
\nu
The exponent is a measure for the number density of polymer configurations in which the shape of the polymer is close to a continuous and differentiable curve.[3]
Thus far, the path integral approach didn't avail us of any novel results. For that, one must venture further than the ideal model. As a first departure from this limited model, we now consider the constraint of spatial obstructions. The ideal model assumed no constraints on the spatial configuration of each additional monomer, including forces between monomers which obviously exist, since two monomers cannot occupy the same space. Here, we'll take the concept of obstruction to encompass not only monomer-monomer interactions, but also constraints that arise from the presence of dust and boundary conditions such as walls or other physical obstructions.[3]
Consider a space filled with small impenetrable particles, or "dust". Denote the fraction of space excluding a monomer end point by
f(\vecR)
0\lef(\vecR)\le1
Constructing a Taylor expansion for
\Phi(\vecR,N+\DeltaN).
\partial\Phi | |
\partialN |
=
l2 | |
6 |
\nabla2-f\Phi
For which the corresponding path integral is:
\Phi(\vecR,N)=
\vecR,N | |
\int | |
0,0 |
\exp\left\{
N | |
-\int | |
0 |
[L0+f(\vecR)]d\nu\right\}l{D}\vecR(\nu)
To model a perfect rigid wall, simply set
style | f(\vecR) |
l2 |
→ +infty
The walls a polymer usually interacts with are complex structures. Not only can the contour be full of bumps and twists, but their interaction with the polymer is far from the rigid mechanical idealization depicted above. In practice, a polymer will often be "absorbed" or condense on the wall due to attractive intermolecular forces. Due to heat, this process is counteracted by an entropy driven process, favoring polymer configurations that correspond to large volumes in phase space. A thermodynamic adsorption-desorption process arises. One common example for this are polymers confined within a cell membrane.
To account for the attraction forces, define a potential per monomer denoted as:
styleV(\vecR)
\exp\left\{-\beta
N | |
\sum | |
j=0 |
V(\vecRj)\right\}\cong\exp\left\{-\beta
N | |
\int | |
0 |
V(\vecR(\nu))\right\}
Where we used
-1 | |
\beta=(k | |
bT) |
T
kb
N → infty \& L → 0
The number of polymer configurations with fixed endpoints can now be determined by the path integral:
QV(\vecRN,N|\vecR0,0)=
\vecRN,N | |
\int | |
\vecR0,0 |
\exp\left\{
N | |
-\int | |
0 |
[L0]d\nu\right\}l{D}\vecR(\nu)
Similarly to the ideal polymer case, this integral can be interpreted as a propagator for the differential equation:
\partialf | |
\partialN |
=
l2 | |
6 |
\nabla2f-\betaV(\vecR)f
This leads to a bi-linear expansion for
QV(\vecRN,N|\vecR0,0)=\sumnfn(\vecRN)
*(\vec | |
f | |
n |
R0)\exp(-ENN)
\left[
l2 | |
6 |
\nabla2f-\betaV(\vecR)\right]fn(\vecRn)=E+nfn(\vecRn)
and so our absorption problem is reduced to an eigenfunction problem.
For a typical well like (attractive) potential this leads to two regimes for the absorption phenomenon, with the critical temperature
Tc
l,V(\vecR)
In high temperatures
T>Tc
<(x → infty)
fn\congAn\sin(\sqrt{6λ
2} | |
n/L |
x)+Bm\cos(\sqrt{6λ
2}x) | |
m/L |
λn
x=0
For low enough temperatures
T<Tc
(x → infty)
f(x0)\congA0\exp(-\sqrt{6
2}x) | |
|λ | |
0|/l |
style | l |
\sqrt{6|λ0| |
A wide variety of adsorption problems boasting a host of "wall" geometries and interaction potentials can be solved using this method.To obtain a quantitatively well defined result one has to use the recovered eigenfunctions and construct the corresponding configuration sum.
For a complete and rigorous solution see.[11]
Another obvious obstruction, thus far blatantly disregarded, is the interactions between monomers within the same polymer. An exact solution for the number of configurations under this very realistic constraint has not yet been found for any dimension larger than one.[3] This problem has historically came to be known as the excluded volume problem. To better understand the problem, one can imagine a random walk chain, as previously presented, with a small hard sphere (not unlike the "specks of dust" mentioned above) at the endpoint of each monomer. The radius of these spheres necessarily obeys
r<l/2
A path integral approach affords a relatively simple method to derive an approximated solution:[12] The results presented are for three dimensional space, but can be easily generalized to any dimensionality.The calculation is based on two reasonable assumptions:
f(\vecR)
In accordance with the path integral expression for
styleQV(\vecRN,N|\vecR0.0)
\vecR*(\nu)
S[\vecR(\nu)]\equiv
N | |
\int | |
0 |
\left\{
3 | |
2l2 |
\left(
d\vecR | |
d\nu |
\right)2+f(\vecR)\right\}d\nu
To minimize the expression, employ calculus of variations and obtain the Euler–Lagrange equation:
3 | |
l2 |
d2\vecR* | |
d\nu2 |
=\nablaf(\vecR*)
We set
R\equivR*
To determine the appropriate function
f(\vecR)
R
dR
4\piR2
style | 4\piR2 |
(4/3)\pir3 |
f(R)dR
On the other hand, the same average should also equal
styled\nu=\left(
dR | |
d\nu |
\right)-1
\nu
0\le\nu\leN
f(\vecR)=
(4/3)\pir3 | |
4\pi |
R2\left(
dR | |
d\nu |
\right)-1
We find
S[\vecR(\nu)]
S[\vecR(\nu)]=
N | |
\int | |
0 |
\left\{
3 | |
2l2 |
\left(
dR | |
d\nu |
\right)2+
(4/3)\pir3 | |
4\pi |
R2\left(
dR | |
d\nu |
\right)-1\right\}d\nu
We again use variation calculus to arrive at:
\left\{
3 | |
l2 |
+
2(4/3)\pir3 | |
4\pi |
R2\left(
dR | |
d\nu |
\right)-3\right\}
d2R | +4 | |
d\nu2 |
(4/3)\pir3 | |
4\pi |
R2\left(
dR | |
d\nu |
\right)-1=0
Note that we now have an ODE for
R(\nu)
f(\vecR*)
R(\nu)=\left(
3\pi | |
(4/3)\pir3L2 |
\right)-1/5\left(
3 | |
5 |
\right)-3/5\nu3/5
We arrived at the important conclusion that for a polymer with excluded volume the end to end distance grows with N like:
R\cong\left(
3\pi | |
(4/3)\pir3L2 |
\right)-1/5N3/5
R\sim\sqrt{N}
So far, the only polymer parameters incorporated into the calculation were the number of monomers
N
l
\psi(\vecr)=\left(
3 | |
2\pil2 |
\right)3/2\exp\left(-
3\vecr2 | |
2l2 |
\right)
So like before, we maintain the result:
\langle\vecr2\rangle=l2
\psi(\vecr)
l
The conformational distribution function for our new bond vector distribution is:
\begin{align} \Psi(\left\{\vecrn\right\})&=
N | |
\prod | |
n=1 |
\psi(\vecrn)\\ &
N\left | |
=\prod | |
n=1 |
(
3 | |
2\pil2 |
\right)3/2\exp\left[-
| |||||||||
2l2 |
\right]\\ &=\left(
3 | |
2\pil2 |
\right)3N/2\exp\left
N | |
[-\sum | |
n=1 |
3(\vecRn-\vecRn-1)2 | |
2l2 |
\right].\end{align}
Where we switched from the relative bond vector
\vecrn
(\vecRn-\vecRn-1)
This conformation is known as the Gaussian chain. The Gaussian approximation for
\psi(\vecr)
An intuitive way to construe this model is as a mechanical model of beads successively connected by a harmonic spring. The potential energy for such a model is given by:
U0(\{\vecRn\})=
3 | |
2l2 |
kbT
N(\vec | |
\sum | |
n=1 |
Rn-\vecRn-1)
At thermal equilibrium one can expect the Boltzmann distribution, which indeed recovers the result above for
\Psi(\left\{\vecrn\right\})
An important property of the Gaussian chain is self-similarity. Meaning the distribution for
\vecRn-\vecRm
l
(n-m)
\phi(\vecRn-\vecRm|n-m)=\left(
3 | |
2\pil2|n-m| |
\right)3/2\exp\left[-
| |||||||||
2|n-m|l2 |
\right]
This immediately leads to
<(\vecRn-\vec
2>=|n-m|l | |
R | |
m) |
2
As was implicitly done in the section for spatial obstructions, we take the suffix
n
\vecRn-\vecRm
\partial\vecRn/\partialn
\Psi(\left\{\vecrn\right\})=\left(
3 | |
2\pil2 |
\right)3N/2\exp\left[-
3 | |
2l2 |
Ndn | |
\int | |
0 |
\left(
\partial\vecRn | |
\partialn |
\right)2\right].
The independent variable transformed from a vector into a function, meaning
\Psi[\vecR(n)]
Assuming an external potential field
Ue(\vecR)
\Psi(\left\{\vecrn\right\})=\left(
3 | |
2\pil2 |
\right)3N/2\exp\left[-
3 | |
2l2 |
Ndn | |
\int | |
0 |
\left(
\partial\vecRn | |
\partialn |
\right)2-\beta
NdnU | |
\int | |
e[\vec |
R(n)]\right].
An important tool in the study of a Gaussian chain conformational distribution is the Green function, defined by the path integral quotient:
G(\vecR,\vecR';N)\equiv
| |||||||||
\vec |
R(n)\exp\left[-
3 | |
2l2 |
\displaystyle\int
Ndn | |
0 |
\left(
\partial\vecRn | |
\partialn |
\right)2-\beta\displaystyle
NduU | |
\int | |
e[\vec |
R(n)]\right]}{\displaystyle\intd\vecR'\displaystyle\intd\vecR\displaystyle
\vecRN=\vecR | |
\int | |
\vecR0=\vecR' |
l{D}\vecRn\exp\left[-
3 | |
2l2 |
\displaystyle
Ndn | |
\int | |
0 |
\left(
\partial\vecRn | |
\partialn |
\right)2\right]}
The path integration is interpreted as a summation over all polymer curves
\vecR(n)
\vecR0=\vecR'
\vecRN=\vecR
For the simple zero field case
Ue=0
G(\vecR-\vecR';N)=\left(
3 | |
2\pil2N |
\right)3/2\exp\left[-
3(\vecR-\vecR')2 | |
2Nl2 |
\right]
In the more general case,
G(\vecR-\vecR';N)
Z=\intd\vecR~d\vecR'~G(\vecR-\vecR';N).
There exists an important identity for the Green function that stems directly from its definition:
G(\vecR,\vecR';N)=\intd\vecR''G(\vecR,\vecR'';N-n)G(\vecR'',\vecR';N), (0<n<N).
This equation has a clear physical significance, which might also serve to elucidate the concept of the path integral:
The product
styleG(\vecR,\vecR'';N-n)G(\vecR'',\vecR';N))
R'
R''
n
R
N
R''
R'
R
With the help of
G(\vecR,\vecR';N)
A
styleA
n
\left\langleA(\vecRn)\right\rangle=
\displaystyle\intd\vecRN~d\vecRn~d\vecR0~G(\vecRN,\vecRn;N-n)G(\vecRn,\vecR0;n)A(\vecRn) | |
\displaystyle\intd\vecRN~\vecdR0~G(\vecRN,\vecR0;N) |
It stands to reason that A should depend on more than one monomer. assuming now it depends on
\vecRm
\vecRn
\left\langleA(\vecRn,\vecRm)\right\rangle=
\displaystyle\intd\vecRN~d\vecRn~d\vecRm~d\vecR0~G(\vecRN,\vecRn;N-n)G(\vecRn,\vecRm;n-m)A(\vecRn,\vecRm) | |
\displaystyle\intd\vecRN~\vecdR0~G(\vecRN,\vecR0;N) |
With an obvious generalization for more monomers dependence.
If one imposes the reasonable boundary conditions:
\begin{align} &G(\vecR,\vecR';N<0)=0\ &G(\vecR,\vecR';0)=\delta(\vecR-\vecR')\\ \end{align}
then with the help of a Taylor expansion for
G(\vecR,\vecR';N+\DeltaN)
G
\left(
\partial | - | |
\partialN |
l2 | |
6 |
\partial2 | |
\partial\vecR2 |
+\betaUe(\vecR))\right)G(\vecR,\vecR';N)=\delta3(\vecR-\vecR')\delta(N).
With the help of this equation the explicit form of
G(\vecR,\vecR';N)
See main article: article and Polymer field theory. A different new approach for finding the power dependence
\left\langle\vecR2\right\rangle\proptoN\alpha
The field theory approach in polymer physics is based on an intimate relationship of polymer fluctuations and field fluctuations. The statistical mechanics of a many particle system can be described by a single fluctuating field. A particle in such an ensemble moves through space along a fluctuating orbit in a fashion that resembles a random polymer chain. The immediate conclusion to be drawn is that large groups of polymers may also be described by a single fluctuating field. As it turns out, the same can be said of a single polymer as well.
In analogy to the original path integral expression presented, the end to end distribution of the polymer now takes the form:
\Phi(\vecR,N)=
\vecR,N | |
\int | |
0,0 |
e-l{A[η]}Pη(N,l)l{D}η
Our new path integrand consists of:
η(\vecR)
l{A}[η]=- | 1 |
2 |
\intd\vecR~d\vecR'~η(\vecR)V-1(\vecR,\vecR')η(\vecR')
V(\vecR,\vecR')
Pη(N,L)=\int\exp\left
N | |
\{-\int | |
0 |
d\nu\left[
M | |
2 |
\vecR |
+η(\vecR(\nu))\right]\right\}l{D}\vecR
\left[
\partial | - | |
\partialN |
1 | |
2M |
\nabla2+η(\vecR)\right]Pη(N,L)=\delta(3)(\vecR-\vecR')\delta(N)
M
Note that the inner integral is now also a path integral, so two spaces of function are integrated over - the polymer conformations -
\vecR(\nu)
η(\vecR)
These path integrals have a physical interpretation. The action
l{A}
η(\vecR)
\vecR(\nu)
η(\vecR)
e-l{A[η]}
η(\vecR)
Such a field description for a fluctuating polymer has the important advantage that it establishes a connection with the theory of critical phenomena in field theory.
To find a solution for
\Phi(\vecR,N)
\left\langleA(\vecRn,\vecRm)\right\rangle
Another simplifying assumption was taken for granted in the treatment presented thus far; All models described a single polymer. Obviously a more physically realistic description will have to account for the possibility of interactions between polymers. In essence, this is an extension of the excluded volume problem.
To see this from a pictorial point, one can imagine a snap shot of a concentrated polymer solution. Excluded volume correlations are now not only taking place within one single chain, but an increasing number of contact points from other chains at increasing polymer concentration yields additional excluded volume. These additional contacts can have substantial effects on the statistical behavior of the individual polymer.
A distinction must be made between two different length scales.[16] One regime will be given by small end to end vector scales
R0<\xi
R0>\xi
\xi
3 | |
C | |
0 |
\simN/N3\sigma=N1-3\sigma
R0\simN\sigma
This is an important result and one immediately sees that for large chain lengths N, the overlapconcentration is very small. The self-avoiding walk previously described is changed and therefore the partition function is no longer ruled by the single polymer volume excluded paths, but by the remaining density fluctuations which are determined by the overall concentration of the polymer solution. In the limit of very large concentrations, imagined by an almost completely filled lattice, the density fluctuations become less and less important.
To begin with, let us generalize the path integral formulation to many chains.The generalization for the partition function calculation is very simple and all that has to be done is to take into account the interaction between all the chain segments:
Z=\int
np | |
\prod | |
\alpha=1 |
l{D}\vecR\alpha(\nu)\exp\{-\betal{H}([\vecR\alpha(\nu)])\}
Where the weighed energy states are defined as:
\displaystyle \betal{H}([\vecR\alpha(\nu)])=
3 | |
2l2 |
np | |
\sum | |
\alpha=1 |
N\alpha | |
\int | |
0 |
\left(
\partial\vecR\alpha | |
\partial\nu |
\right)2d\nu+
1 | |
2 |
\sigma
np | |
\sum | |
\alpha,\beta=1 |
N\alpha | |
\int | |
0 |
d\nu
N\beta | |
\int | |
0 |
d\nu'\delta(\vecR\alpha(\nu)-\vecR\beta(\nu'))
With
np
This is generally not simple and the partition function cannot be computed exactly.One simplification is to assume monodispersity which means that all chains have the same length. or, mathematically:
N\alpha=N\beta \forall \alpha,\beta
Another problem is that the partition function contains too many degrees of freedom. The number of chains
np
\rho(\vecx)=
1 | |
V |
np | |
\sum | |
\alpha=1 |
N | |
\int | |
0 |
d\nu\delta(\vecx-\vecR\alpha(\nu)).
V
\rho(\vecx)
\vecx
The transformation
l{H}([\vecR\alpha(\nu)]) → l{H}([\rho(\vecx)])