,
therefore in some cases twin range can be defended.
-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: Re: [gmx-users] r_list and r_coulomb values while using PME
OZGE ENGIN wrote
ubject: Re: [gmx-users] r_list and r_coulomb values while using PME
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 reacti
-Original Message-
From: David van der Spoel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Discussion list for GROMACS users
Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2007 13:37:05 +0200
Subject: Re: [gmx-users] r_list and r_coulomb values while using PME
OZGE ENGIN wrote:
Hi all,
I can not understand why it is required to take sa
ntion!
Oz.
-Original Message-
From: David van der Spoel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Discussion list for GROMACS users
Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2007 13:37:05 +0200
Subject: Re: [gmx-users] r_list and r_coulomb values while using PME
OZGE ENGIN wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I can not underst
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
5 matches
Mail list logo