OZGE ENGIN wrote:
So, using twin-range cut-off does not violate the energy conservation for RC
method, but it violates for PME method. Is this the case ?
twin range does not conserve energy with cutoff or RF either. however
you must always compromise between accuracy and computational cost,
t
Hi,
>
>
> My point was rather the opposite - when people measure area/lipid in the
> lab on bilayer slabs there will be undulations present since they are
> typically not under tension. We discussed this with John Nagle a couple of
> years ago, and came to the conclusion that you should not try
So, using twin-range cut-off does not violate the energy conservation for RC
method, but it violates for PME method. Is this the case ?
-Original Message-
From: David van der Spoel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Discussion list for GROMACS users
Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2007 14:48:03 +0200
Subject: R
OZGE ENGIN wrote:
'The force is not the derivative of the potential', is it due to the types of calculations performed in PME, using of FFT for reciprocal sum? Because it does not matter while using reaction-field method.
Sorry, this phenomenon is a little complicated to me :)
this is only w
'The force is not the derivative of the potential', is it due to the types of
calculations performed in PME, using of FFT for reciprocal sum? Because it does
not matter while using reaction-field method.
Sorry, this phenomenon is a little complicated to me :)
Thanks for your attention!
Oz.
OZGE ENGIN wrote:
Hi all,
I can not understand why it is required to take same values for both r_list
and r_coulomb parameters when using PME for calculation of electrostatic
interactions?
I read archieve, and gromacs manual. In archieve, similar question had been
posted, but not replied ye
Hi all,
I can not understand why it is required to take same values for both r_list
and r_coulomb parameters when using PME for calculation of electrostatic
interactions?
I read archieve, and gromacs manual. In archieve, similar question had been
posted, but not replied yet.
Thanks in advanc
I found one see this paper
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1302891&blobtype=p
df
it is defined by sigma_M
Best regards
Yuguang
Dr. Yuguang Mu
Assistant Professor
School of Biological Sciences
Nanyang Technological University
60 Nanyang Drive Singapore 637551 Tel: +65-63162
Mu Yuguang (Dr) wrote:
No, net charge density estimated from experimental data.
what does it mean, how is it measured?
you can have nuclear charge minus electron density, but this is not very
accurate.
--
David van der Spoel, Ph.D.
Molec. Biophys. group, Dept. of Cell & Molec. Biol., Uppsal
No, net charge density estimated from experimental data.
Best regards
Yuguang
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David van der Spoel
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2007 4:49 PM
To: Discussion list for GROMACS users
Subject: Re: [gmx-users] ch
Mu Yuguang (Dr) wrote:
Dear all,
How to estimate the charge density of a lipid , the reason we want to do
is that we try a model system to mimic the lipid environment.
It seems out of GROMACS discussion range, but I believe many Gromacs
users do lipid simulations.
do you mean electron dens
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Haven't looked into the details yet, but this is worth noting for those
interested. Thanks William.
- Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2007 00:15:25 -0400
From: William Noid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: William Noid <[EMAIL P
Dear all,
How to estimate the charge density of a lipid , the reason we want to do
is that we try a model system to mimic the lipid environment.
It seems out of GROMACS discussion range, but I believe many Gromacs
users do lipid simulations.
Best regards
Yuguang
Hi,
On Aug 31, 2007, at 11:02 PM, Hwankyu Lee wrote:
Thank you very much for your suggestion in the gromacs forum, but I
may not understand your explanation completely. In the small
bilayer, there is no fluctuation, so area/lipid can be calculated
based on the cell dimensions. But, in
Hi Serdar,
The gromacs mailing list gives a hit on fullerene from earlier this
year. Also, a quick search on scholar.google.com
(http://scholar.google.nl/scholar?q=fullerene+gromacs&hl=en&lr=&btnG=Search)
also gives some hits.
Tsjerk
On 8/31/07, serdar durdagi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear a
Hi Arneh,
Yes. As you should be able to recall, the (linear, not "generalized")
correlation is formally given as:
cor(x,y) = cov(x,y) / ( sqrt(var(x))*sqrt(var(y)) )
The diagonal elements of the covariance matrix give the variances...
Cheers,
Tsjerk
On 8/31/07, Arneh Babakhani <[EMAIL PROTECT
16 matches
Mail list logo