4.7 Article

Evidence for growing structural correlation length in colloidal supercooled liquids

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW E
卷 106, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.106.054601

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Sci-ence Foundation of China
  2. Strategic Priority Research Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences
  3. [12174434]
  4. [11874395]
  5. [XDB33000000]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

By using video microscopy, the long-time diffusion coefficients of colloidal particles at different concentrations were measured. It was found that the measured values deviate from theoretical predictions in the supercooled regime. However, the theoretical diffusion relation can be recovered by assigning an effective mass proportional to the size of structurally correlated clusters to the diffusing particles, which provides an indirect method to probe the growth of static correlation length scales approaching the glass transition. This method was validated in quasi-two-dimensional experiments of crystallization of mono-disperse colloids.
Using video microscopy, we measure the long-time diffusion coefficients of colloidal particles at different concentrations. The measured diffusion coefficients start to deviate from theoretical predictions based on random collision models upon entering the supercooled regime. The theoretical diffusion relation is recovered by assigning an effective mass proportional to the size of structurally correlated clusters to the diffusing particles, providing an indirect method to probe the growth of static correlation length scales approaching the glass transition. This method is tested and validated in the crystallization of mono-disperse colloids in quasi -two-dimensional experiments. The correlation length obtained for a binary colloidal liquid increases by a power law toward a critical packing fraction of similar to 0.79. The system relaxation time exhibits a power-law dependence on the correlation length in agreement with dynamical facilitation theories.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据