J. Pure Appl. & Ind. Phys. Vol.

1 (3), 178-184 (2011)

An Evaluation of Ground State Energy of Twodimensional

Liquid 4He Interacting through LennardJones the Aziz
Potential at Various Densities
S. K. CHOUDHARY* and L. K. MISHRA
Department of Physics,
Magadh University, Bodh-Gaya, Bihar, India.
ABSTRACT
Using theoretical formulation of ChungIn Um et. al., the ground
state energy of two-dimensional liquid 4He interacting through
LennardJones and Aziz potential were calculated at various
densities. Our theoretical result indicates that ground state energy
of two dimensional liquid 4He interacting with Aziz potential is
close to GFMC calculation.

INTRODUCTION
In the previous paper,1 we have
presented a method of evaluation of radial
distribution function g(r) of two
dimensional liquid 4He interacting through
the Aziz potential at various densities using
the theoretical formalism of ChungIn Um
et. al.2 In this paper, using the same
theoretical formalism, we have evaluated the
ground state energy of two dimensional
liquid. 4He interacting through Lennard
Jones and Aziz potential at various densities.
For many years, physicist have used
hypernetted chain (HNC) and Fermi
hypernetted chain (FHNC) theories to
investigate the properties of highly
correlated interacting boson and fermion
systems such as liquid 4He and normal
3,4
liquid 3He. The HNC/FHNC equations

with Jastrow groundstate wave functions

treat consistently both long and short
correlations of the system and give
agreements
to
some
degree
with
experimental results. In spite of qualitative
successes of the Jastrow groundstate
function, there exist quantitative differences
between
HNC/FHNC
results
and
experimental
ones,
especially
the
equilibrium groundstate energy, and this
fact leads one to consider the contributions
arising from the threebody correlation
functions.5 It is well known that the three
body correlations do not affect seriously the
structural properties of ground states, such
as the radial distribution function and liquid
structure
function,
but
contribute
significantly to the groundstate energy.
3
Since liquid He system is less dense than

Journal of Pure Applied and Industrial Physics Vol.1, Issue 3, 30 April, 2011, Pages (162-211)

179

S. K. Choudhary, et al., J. Pure Appl. & Ind. Phys. Vol.1 (3), 178-184 (2011)

liquid 4He, that is, the equilibrium density of

the former is 0.0166 1 while that of the
latter is 0.02185 3 in a threedimensional
system, effects of threebody correlations in
He are rather small compared to those in
4He. At equilibrium density, they make up
about half the difference between the
Jastrow results and experimental energy in a
5

liquid He system and lower the Jastrow

groundstate energy by about 10 % in liquid
He.
A trial groundstate wave function
including threebody correlation functions
in addition to twobody correlation effects
can be constructed in the form
r r
r
r1 , r2 , . . . r N

i<i

dr i dr , r
ij

i < j< k

ij

interpolating equation approximation. Both

techniques have shown their efficiency for
central twobody correlations, providing
similar results for the total groundstate
energy to those of the variational Monte
Carlo simulation. The scaling approximation
uses the fact that successive contributions of
the five, six and higher order elementary
diagrams are approximately proportional to
and have very similar spatial behaviour to
6

g=

diagrams and therefore one must calculate

each diagram individually, which is very
time consuming. During the last two
decades, two approximations for the
estimation of the elementary diagrams have
been developed. One is known as the scaling
6
approximation, and the other is the

jk

, r ki = F

where f2 (rij) is the twobody correlation

function which describes spatial correlations
and depends only upon the spatial distance
rij between two particle f3 (rij, rjk, rKi) is a
threebody correlation function, and | is
the anti-symmetric product of non
interacting singleparticle plane waves
normalized in the system's area with N
fermions, which becomes simply unity for
boson systems.
In addition to the threebody
correlation functions in the groundstate
wave function, one should take into account
the contributions coming from the
elementary diagrams as well as effects of the
HNC/FHNC equations to obtain better
results. Unfortunately, there does not exist a
general closed expression for the elementary

the fourbody elementary diagrams, so that

one can represent the total elementary
diagram contribution by means of the readily
calculable fourbody elementary diagrams.
The interpolating equation approximation
determines a parameter such that it gives the
same value for the classical isothermal
compressibility obtained from both the
HNC/FHNC equations and PercusYevick8
equations using the classical pressure
derivative or the compressibility integral.
Although

large

number
4
theoretical works regarding He and
912

of

He

system have been reported

but very few
of them have been used for twodimensional
liquid.
13
ChungIn Um et. al.
have
developed a theoretical model to study two
dimensional quantum fluid. By taking their
model, one has evaluated the radial
distribution function g(r) as a function of r

Journal of Pure Applied and Industrial Physics Vol.1, Issue 3, 30 April, 2011, Pages (162-211)

S. K. Choudhary, et al., J. Pure Appl. & Ind. Phys. Vol.1 (3), 178-184 (2011)
for two dimensional liquid 4He interacting
through Aziz potential for various densities.
In section 2, we have given the mathematical
formulae used in the evaluation. The
discussion of the result has been given in
section 3 of this paper. In the last portion,
we have shown the tables of the results and
the reference taken.
MATHEMATICAL FORMULAE USED
IN THE EVALUATION
The Hamiltonian for the considered
system is given by
H= T+V=

T +V
i

ij

i< j

r r
h
V ri ri
2i +
m i
i< j

(1)
where V(r) is the interatomic interaction. A
popular potential used in theoretical
investigations is that of LennardJones,
which has two parameters, i.e., the hard
core radius and the well depth, and can be
written as

bg

= 10.22 K, = 2.556
(2)
However, VLJ(r) includes only the
dipoledipole interaction and does not take
into account multiple interactions. A more
physically realistic potential which accounts
for the selfconsistent field HartreeFock
repulsion and multiple interactions is the
HFDHE2 potential of Aziz et. al.12
presented as

LM
MN

IJ |RS FG IJ
K |T H K
FG r IJ F br gU|V OP
HrK
|W QP
FG
H

VLJ r = * A exp

bg

+ c8

FG r IJ
HrK
m

r
r
c6 m
rm
r

b g R|S|exp bDr1 / r 1g
T

Fr =

D = 1.241314,

rm

= 2.9673

The nparticle distribution function is

represented as

r r
p n = r1 ,... rn = n N N 1 ... N 1
r
r
r
r r
r
+ r1 ,... rn r1 ,... rn drn +1... drN

gb

g b

(4)

where r1 denotes the spatial coordinates of

the ith particle and v is the spin degeneracy
of the system (2 for this system). In the
homogeneous system, as N and ,
the singleparticle distribution function
reduces to the density of the system so that
the radial distribution function can be
expressed interms of the density and two
particle distribution function p2(r) as
1
p2 r =
2

bg
2

r r
r r r
r
b gFGH IJK z br ,...r gbr|,...r gdr ...dr

N N 1

(3)

r / rm < D

It is well known from the Green's

function Monte Carlo simulations and other
variational calculations that the Aziz
potential gives closer results to experiments
than VLJ in three dimensions. One uses both
potentials and compare the results with those
in two dimensions.

bg

r / rm D

(4)
The values of the constants are
A = 0.54485 106, */kB = 10.8
= 13.353384,
C6
= 1.3732412
C8 = 0.4253785,
C10 = 0.178100

gr =

10

+ c 10

where

z b

LMFG IJ FG IJ OP
MNH r K H r K PQ ,
12

VLJ r = 4

180

Journal of Pure Applied and Industrial Physics Vol.1, Issue 3, 30 April, 2011, Pages (162-211)

(5)

181

S. K. Choudhary, et al., J. Pure Appl. & Ind. Phys. Vol.1 (3), 178-184 (2011)

One uses the FHNC approximation

to sum the diagrams arising from the cluster
properties of g(r). In this scheme, g(r) can be
decomposed as

g rij = g dd rij + 2g de rij + g ee rij

d i

d i

d i

d i

(6)

where dd, de and ee represent terms in

which both i and j are not exchanged, only j
is exchanged, and both i and j are
exchanged, respectively. The components of
g(rij) are given by

g dd rij = exp u2 rij + N dd rij + Edd rij

d i

d i

d i

d i

g de rij = g dd rij N de rij + Ede rij

d i

d i d i

d i

(7)

g dr i = g dr iLL dr i / + N dr i + E dr i + eN dr i + E dr ij O
NM
QP
2

ee

ij

dd

ij

ij

ee

ij

ee

ij

ee

ij

ed

ij

g ee rij = g dd rij L rij /

d i

d id i

where

d i

d i e d i
lb x g = 2 j bx g / x

d ij

L rij = l k F rij + N ee rij + Eee rij

1

(8)
(9)

kF is the Fermi momentum of the system,

and j1(x) is the Bessel's function of the first
kind of order 1. Nmm represent sums of the
nodal diagrams and Enm sums of the
elementary diagrams. The equation gee(rij)
denotes the terms in which both i and j are
exchanged in an incomplete exchange loop,
and Nee(rij) and Eee(rij) are sums of the nodal
diagrams and the elementary diagrams in
which i and j belong to the same permutation
loop, respectively.
With the FHNC equation and
expression for the g(r), one now calculates
the energy per particle of the system

V
T
E var 1 H
=
=
+
N
N N |
N
N

(10)

The potential energy per particle is

expressed by taking the thermodynamic
limit, i.e., the area of system and the
number of particles N are infinite, keeping
the density constant as

V
r
=
drij V rij g rij
N
2

d id i

(11)

The expression for the or the kinetic

energy part is more complicated. There are
three well-known expression for the helium
system i.e., JacksonFreeberg,10 Clark
Westhous11 and BethePandharipande.12
Among expressions for the kinetic energy
per particle. The JacsonFeenberg form is
popular and easily tractable since its three
particle distribution part is not more
significant than others. One uses here the
JacksonFeenberg
and
the
Bethe
Pandharipande forms so that we make use of
the scaling approximation for the elementary
diagrams. From the identity

r 1

2 dr =
4

r

2 2
+ 2
. dr

h c hb g

c hc

(12)
the JacksonFeenberg
obtained as
E JF
h2
1
=
N
2 mN |

h2
2mN

1
|

energy

F2 2 i2 +

F2

2
i

form

1 2
1
Fi F i F
2
2

b g

r
r
d r1 . . . d r N +

= TF = WB + W + U

Journal of Pure Applied and Industrial Physics Vol.1, Issue 3, 30 April, 2011, Pages (162-211)

is

V
N

(13)

S. K. Choudhary, et al., J. Pure Appl. & Ind. Phys. Vol.1 (3), 178-184 (2011)
The

first

term

of

Eq.

(13),

TF = h k / 4 m ,
2

2
F

is the noninteracting
fermion energy with the Fermi momentum

k F = 4 / v , and the second, W is the

B

182

where W and U are the bosonic energies per

particle, and WF and UF are from the last
term of Eq. (19)

b gLMM b g FGH IJK b b g g OPP

z
N
Q
(21)
energy of the boson system.
L br g. br g OP
h
U=
d r d r g c r r , r hM
z
2
m
L
O
N b r g b r g Q

h b r g c b r gh
P
W =
d rgb r gM Vb r g
W=

h2 2 r
d 2 rg r V r
2
m
2 r
2

b g

MN

WF =

The forms of W and U are

h
W =
d 2 r g dd r 1 1 k F r N ee r + E cc r
4 mv

{ bg e b g c bg

b g b g

b gh j

h 2 2
d 2 r12 d 2 r13 g dd r12 1 l k F r12 . g dd r13 1
8m

c b g h b

gc b g h

l k F r13 g ee r23

b g b g

(16)

h 2
U =
d 2 r12 d 2 r13g 3 r12 , r23 , r13 2 u 3 r12 , r23 , r13
16m

(17)
The PandharipandeBethe energy
form is obtained by expanding the kinetic
energy per particle as

h2
1
2 mN |

F i2 F =

PB

N
(18)

which yields
T

PB

h2
1
2 mN |

12

12

13

13

13

h
2m
2

brgLM brg.brglbk r g OP
N
Q
2

(23)

d 2 r12 2 r12 . l k F r13

b g b g

b g b g b g} og br gg br 2gdg br g 1i + g br gg br gg br gt
(15)

ee

U =

h 2
d rg ee
2m

UF =

l k F r + l k F r d dd r E cc r l k F r
2

12 , 23

(22)

PQ

2 r

(14)
2

13 3

bg

2m

12

F 2i + 2i + 2 i F

b g

13

dy

dy

32

dd

13

ee

23

After some calculations, we obtained EPB/N

as

E PB
= TF + W + Wr + U + U F
N

(20)

31

(24)
For numerical calculations, one
adopts the McMillan type function as a trial
twobody correlation functions, which is
widely used in variational and Monte Carlo
calculations for liquid and solid helium
systems.
5
b
u2 r =
r
(25)
where b is a variational parameter chosen to
give an optimized radial distribution
function at a given density. To obtain more
precise results, we include threebody
correlation effects in the following forms:

b g FGH IJK

u 3 rij , r jk , rki = rij r jk r$ij . r$jk

d i d id

cyc

i
(26)

(19)

ee

LM F r r I OP
MN GH JK PQ
2

r = l r exp

bg

(27)
where cyc denotes the cyclic permutation
among the three particle coordinates i, j and
k, and

r$ij

is a unit vector along the line

Journal of Pure Applied and Industrial Physics Vol.1, Issue 3, 30 April, 2011, Pages (162-211)

183

S. K. Choudhary, et al., J. Pure Appl. & Ind. Phys. Vol.1 (3), 178-184 (2011)

connecting particle i and j. Since it was first

used in a variational Monte Carlo
13

calculation. this form for the threebody

correlations is generally used in variational
HNC/FHN methods.

14

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

Jastrow two body correlation function in the

trial wavefunction and within the HNC
approximation. His other calculation for
energy per particle is by taking two body
correlation and contribution of four order
elementary diagrams. We have taken three
body as well as towbody correlations
15

In this paper, we have evaluated the

ground state energy of two dimensional
liquid 4He interacting through Lennard
Jones and Aziz potential at various densities.
We have used the theoretical formalism of

within the scaling approximation. Our

theoretical calculation indicates that the two
dimensional liquid 4He system interesting
through Aziz potential in more close to the
14

ChungIn Um et. al. in our evaluation.

ChungIn Um2 calculated ground state

GFMC calculation. Comparing with two

potential, one conclude that Aziz potential is
more suitable to describe, the ground state of
the two dimensional helium system, similar

energy of two dimensional liquid 4He with a

to bulk case.

16

Table T1
4
Evaluated results of ground state energy of twodimensional liquid He interacting through the
LennardJones potential at various density
Ground state energy E(k)/N
(2)
Our's

Chang's13 results

GFMC Calculations14

0.020

0.520

0.628

0.504

0.025

0.546

0.637

0.546

0.030

0.624

0.658

0.589

0.035

0.658

0.586

0.627

0.040

0.748

0.552

0.553

0.045

0.786

0.505

0.524

0.050

0.842

0.486

0.508

0.055

0.725

0.453

0.493

0.060

0.556

0.446

0.486

Journal of Pure Applied and Industrial Physics Vol.1, Issue 3, 30 April, 2011, Pages (162-211)

S. K. Choudhary, et al., J. Pure Appl. & Ind. Phys. Vol.1 (3), 178-184 (2011)

184

Table T2
4
Evaluated results of ground state energy [E(k)/N] of twodimensional liquid He interacting
through Aziz potential at various densities
2
Ground state energy E(k)/N
( )
Our's
Chang's13 results
GFMC Calculations14
0.020
0.025
0.030
0.035
0.040
0.045
0.050
0.055
0.060

0.487
0.509
0.586
0.627
0.723
0.706
0.658
0.532
0.456

0.586
0.603
0.658
0.709
0.682
0.596
0.542
0.506
0.487

REFERENCES
1. S.K. Singh and L.K. Mishra, ACTA
CIENITA INDICA, 'Pragati Prakashan',
Meerut.
2. ChungIn Um et. al. J. Low Temp. Phys.
(JLTP), 108, 283 (1998).
3. E. Krotscheck, Phys. Rev. B 33, 3158
(1986); Q.N. Usmani, S. Fantoni and
V.R. Pasldharipande, Phys. Rev. B 26,
6123 (1982).
4. F. Arias de Saavedra and E. Buendia,
Phys. Rev. B 42, 6018 (1990); M.
Viviani, E. Buendia, S. Fantoni and S.
Rosati, Ibid., 38, 4523 (1988).
5. E. Manouskais, S. Fantonia, V.R.
Pandharipande and Q.N. Usmani, Phys.
Rev. B 28, 3770 (1983).
6. Q.N. Usmani, B. Friedman and V.R.
Pandharipande, Phys. Rev. B 25, 4502
(1982).
7. A. Fabrocini and S. Rosati, Nuoro

0.523
0.588
0.602
0.657
0.697
0.602
0.524
0.486
0.442

Cimento D 1, 567 (1982); Ibid., 615 (1982).

8. J.K. Percus and G.J. Yevick, Phys. Rev.
110, 1 (1958).
9. R.A. Aziz, V.P.S. Nain, J.S. Carley,
W.I. Taylor and G.T. Conville, J. Chem.
Phys. 70, 4330 (1979).
10. H.W. Jackson and E. Feenberg, Ann.
Phys. (N.Y.) 15, 266 (1961).
11. J.W. Clark and P. westhaus, Phys. Rev.
141, 833 (1966).
12. V.R. Pandharipande and H.A. Bethe,
Phys. Rev. C 7, 1312 (1973).
13. C.C. Chang, J. Low. Temp. Phys. (JLTP)
38, 25 (1980).
14. P.A. Whitlock, G.V. Chester and M.H.
Kalos, Phys. Rev. B 38, 2418 (1988).
15. K. Schmidt, M.H. Kalos, M.A. Lee and
G.V. Chester, Phys. Rev. Lett. (PRL) 45,
573 (1980).
16. L.R. Whitney, F.J. Pinsky and C.E.
Campbell, J. Low Temp. Phys. (JLTP)
44, 367 (1981).

Journal of Pure Applied and Industrial Physics Vol.1, Issue 3, 30 April, 2011, Pages (162-211)