## You are here

# Linear scaling solution of the all-electron Coulomb problem in solids

In this manuscript (available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.1765), we present a systematically improvable, linear scaling formulation for the solution of the all-electron Coulomb problem in crystalline solids. In an infinite crystal, the electrostatic (Coulomb) potential is a sum of nuclear and electronic contributions, and each of these terms diverges and the sum is only conditionally convergent due to the long-range 1/r nature of the Coulomb interaction. In the all-electron quantum-mechanical problem in solids, there are three distinct divergences that must be addressed simultaneously: (1) the 1/r divergence of the electrostatic potential at the nuclei; (2) the divergence of both potential and energy lattice sums due to the long-range Coulomb interaction; and (3) the infinite self energies of the nuclei.

We achieve linear scaling by introducing smooth, strictly local neutralizing densities to render nuclear interactions strictly local, and solving the remaining neutral Poisson problem for the electrons in real space. In so doing, the all-electron problem is decomposed into analytic strictly-local nuclear, and numerical long-range electronic parts; with required numerical solution in the Sobolev space , so that convergence is assured and approximation is optimal in the energy norm. Expressions for the Coulomb energy per unit cell, analytically excluding the divergent nuclear self-energy, are derived. Rapid variations in the required neutral electronic potential in the vicinity of the nuclei are efficiently treated by an enriched finite element solution, using local radial solutions as enrichments (see this paper). We demonstrate the accuracy and convergence of the approach by direct comparison to standard Ewald sums for a lattice of point charges, and demonstrate the accuracy in quantum-mechanical calculations with an application to crystalline diamond.

For some background material on density-functional theory and all-electron calculations, the discussions in the September 2008 and February 2009 journal club issues are pertinent.

- N. Sukumar's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
- 4810 reads

## Comments

## It reminds me of the Olber's paradox... is there an analog?

This divergence due to 1/r singularity, reminds me of Olber's paradox. Is there a similarity? Mike

Olbers' paradox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation,

search

This article

needs additional citations for verification.Please help improve this article by adding

reliable

references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.

(September 2008)Olbers' paradox in action

In astrophysics and physical cosmology,

Olbers' paradoxis theargument that the darkness of the night sky conflicts with the

assumption of an infinite and eternal static universe. It is one of the pieces of evidence for a

non-static universe such as the current Big Bang model. The argument is also referred to as the "

dark" The paradox states that at any angle from thenight sky paradox

Earth the sight line will end at the surface of a star. To understand

this we compare it to standing in a forest of white trees. If at any

point the vision of the observer ended at the surface of a tree,

wouldn't the observer only see white? This contradicts the darkness of

the night sky and leads many to wonder why we do not see only light from

stars in the night sky (see physical paradox).

Contents

[hide]

explanation

light

Universe; the origin of all light is a finite distance away

explanations

redshifts

background

distribution

Michele Ciavarella, http://poliba.academia.edu/micheleciavarella

Editor, Italian Science Debate, www.sciencedebate.it

blogs http://rettorevirtuoso.blogspot.com/

YouTube Channel http://www.youtube.com/user/RettoreVirtuoso