in classical statistical mechanics , particles with shapes are ubiquitous . their prominence in granular matter @xcite , soft condensed matter @xcite , and , more specifically , biological matter @xcite , is well established .
their shapes vary from the highly complex such as folded proteins to the most elementary such as hard spheres .
their equilibrium and nonequilibrium properties are investigated by a broad array of experimental and computational probes .
analytic approaches in this area of research see their predictive power restricted to fairly simple scenarios regarding shapes , environment , and dimensionality . for rigorous calculations the domains of applicability
are further narrowed .
this limitation finds ample compensation in their usefulness as benchmarks and anchor points for approximations and simulations .
the work reported in the following is motivated by this chain of reasoning .
it deals with hard rods in one dimension at thermal equilibrium in external potentials .
we consider monodisperse rods of size @xmath1 , @xmath2 on a lattice ( linear array of cells with volume @xmath0 ) .
hard rods of size @xmath5 populating a continuum emerge from the limit @xmath3 , @xmath4 with @xmath6 .
there are several approaches that facilitate an exact derivation of thermodynamic and structural properties for a homogeneous one - dimensional hard rod system ( tonks gas ) with first - neighbor takahashi - type interactions @xcite .
one rather elegant method uses convolution relations between boltzmann factors to determine partition functions @xcite .
it produces the free enthalpy and the equation of state ( eos ) for first - neighbor interactions of arbitrary range .
many - body - density distribution functions can be calculated by an extension of this approach @xcite .
an alternative method of similar scope has recently been developed .
it uses statistically interacting vacancy particles ( sivp ) as quasiparticles @xcite .
this method also yields the size distribution of vacancies between rods .    on the basis of these approaches for homogeneous systems ,
it is possible to treat inhomogeneous systems by assuming that the eos is valid on a coarse - grained local scale . from the requirement of mechanical equilibrium , spatial variations of pressure and density
can then be calculated from the spatial variations of the external potential .
this provides a simple and common thermodynamic route for calculating density and pressure profiles @xcite , which generally is a difficult task for an interacting many - particle system .
we will refer to this thermodynamic route as the eos method in the following . because the eos method relies on the assumption of the existence of a local eos
, it is interesting to gain insight into how far this assumption is justified and whether the method gives useful information even if the underlying assumption does not hold .    to tackle this question
analytically , exact results for inhomogeneous systems are required . for hard rods with first - neighbor interactions in one dimension ,
exact treatments are possible via recursion relations for partition functions @xcite or density functional theory ( dft ) @xcite .
these methods allow for the exact derivation of density profiles as well as many - body distribution functions .
given exact density profiles , pressure profiles can be obtained by resorting to the requirement of mechanical equilibrium as in the eos method , but without assuming a local eos .
the exact calculation of local pressures is a more subtle task .
generally , the local pressure can be defined via the trace of the local stress tensor , which governs the time evolution of the momentum density in a coarse - grained continuum description @xcite . in case of pair interaction forces , thermodynamic averaging over the corresponding local stress tensor
allows for the determination of pressure profiles from the density profiles and pair distribution function .
our calculations here will employ two approaches .
the dft for lattice fluids @xcite is used to determine exact density profiles in external fields and the sivp approach @xcite is used as a realization of the eos method .
the dft and sivp approaches have domains that partially overlap and strengths that complement each other . in the dft , the operational degrees of freedom are the rods themselves . in the sivp approach ,
the operational degrees of freedom are the vacancies between the rods .
we begin by describing the general methodology and background ( sec .
[ sec : meth ] ) and then proceed with applications to rods in a uniform gravitational field ( sec .  [ sec : grav ] ) and in a power - law trap ( sec .
[ sec : powe ] ) . the subtleties regarding average microscopic pressure
are addressed in the context of the first application .
steric wall effects in lattice systems and their relations to known continuum results are discussed in sec .
[ sec : ster ] . in sec .
[ sec : conc ] we summarize the main conclusions and outline projected extensions to polydisperse rods .
appendices [ sec : appa ] and [ sec : appc ] summarize outlying background materials for use in the main text . appendix [ sec : appb ] presents a highly practical method of calculating exact density profiles within the dft framework for arbitrary external potentials .
consider rods on a linear chain @xmath7 of lattice sites , represented in fig .
[ fig : sketch - dft ] as an array of cells .
each cell has volume @xmath0 .
rods of size @xmath8 occupy that many adjacent cells .
hard walls at both ends of the chain define the boundary conditions . assuming that cells ( and rods ) have unit cross section we can conveniently use @xmath0 as a microscopic scale for both volume and length .
microstates of this system are encoded in a sequence of occupation numbers , @xmath9 , @xmath10 . to a rod that occupies sites @xmath11
, we assign the occupation number @xmath12 .
hardcore exclusion imposes the conditions @xmath13 , @xmath14 , and the hard walls imply @xmath15 for @xmath16 and @xmath17 , respectively .     at positions @xmath18 on a lattice of size @xmath19 .
the relevant external potentials @xmath20 and interaction potentials @xmath21 are stated .
one is a contact potential and the other represents an interaction of maximum range @xmath22.,width=321 ]    the model system analyzed in this work is specified by the hamiltonian , @xmath23 where @xmath20 is an external potential and @xmath21 an interaction potential restricted to first - neighbor rods .
the first - neighbor restriction is naturally ascertained by interactions @xmath21 with a range limited to @xmath24 , where @xmath25 , but an extended range between first - neighbor rods is permitted .    in this work
we mainly examine the effects of hardcore repulsion in combination with external potentials .
contact forces are included in one application ( secs .
[ sec : grav - sivp - cont ] and [ sec : grav - dft - cont ] ) .
the effects of long - range forces are being analyzed in a separate study @xcite .
the analysis carried out in @xcite is based on former work @xcite and expresses the grand potential as a density functional , i.e. a functional of the mean occupation numbers of rods @xmath26 ) , but with @xmath20 replaced by @xmath27 , where @xmath27 is the unique external ` mermin potential ' that ( for given interaction @xmath21 ) would generate the @xmath28 as the mean occupation numbers in equilibrium . ]
@xmath29=f[\tilde n_1,\ldots,\tilde n_l]+ \sum_{i=1}^{l}(\mathcal{u}_i-\mu)\tilde n_i\,,\ ] ] where @xmath30 is the chemical potential
. the intrinsic free - energy functional in eq .  ( [ eq : omega ] ) can be written in the form @xmath31&=\sum_{i=1}^l f_i[\tilde{\mathbf{n } } ] = \sum_{i=1}^l ( e_i[\tilde{\mathbf{n}}]-ts_i[\tilde{\mathbf{n}}])\,,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath32 is the temperature , and @xmath33=e_i[\tilde{\mathbf{n}}]-ts_i[\tilde{\mathbf{n}}]$ ] , @xmath34 $ ] , and @xmath35 $ ] are local functionals of the intrinsic free energy , internal interaction energy , and entropy .
the latter are given by @xmath36=\sum_{j = i+\sigma}^{i+\xi } \mathcal{v}_{i , j}c_{i , j}[\tilde{\mathbf{n}}]\end{aligned}\ ] ] and @xmath37=&-k_\mathrm{b}\bigl\{\phi(a_i[\tilde{\mathbf{n } } ] ) + \phi(b_{i , i}[\tilde{\mathbf{n}}])-\phi(b_{i-1,i}[\tilde{\mathbf{n } } ] ) + \nonumber\\ & \hspace*{-2em}{}+ \sum_{j = i-\xi}^{i-\sigma}\bigl[\phi(c_{i , j}[\tilde{\mathbf{n } } ] )    + \phi(d_{i , j}[\tilde{\mathbf{n}}])-    \phi(d_{i-1,j}[\tilde{\mathbf{n}}])\bigr ] \bigr\}\end{aligned}\ ] ] with pair correlators @xmath38=\langle n_in_j\rangle , \label{eq : correlators}\end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath39 , and , @xmath40 and @xmath41 refer to the probabilities to have zero or one rod in ` one - particle cavities ' , i.e. in intervals , where at most one rod can be placed . ]
[ eq : abc ] @xmath42=\tilde n_i -\sum_{j = i-\xi}^{i-\sigma}c_{i , j}[\tilde{\mathbf{n}}]\,,\ ] ] @xmath43= 1-\sum_{k = j-\xi}^i\tilde
n_k + \sum_{k = j-\xi+\sigma}^{i}\sum_{l = j-\xi}^{k-\sigma } c_{k , l}[\tilde{\mathbf{n}}]\,,\ ] ] @xmath44=\tilde n_j -\sum_{k = j+\sigma}^ic_{k , j}[\tilde{\mathbf{n}}]\,.\ ] ]    the pair correlators ( [ eq : correlators ] ) have their dependence on @xmath45 encoded in the implicit relations , @xmath46    the equilibrium density profile of rods follows from the extremum condition , @xmath47=0 , \quad i=1,\ldots , l.\ ] ] with the solution @xmath48 of ( [ eq : structure - equations ] ) , the functions @xmath49 $ ] , @xmath50 $ ] and @xmath51 $ ] become the intrinsic free energy , internal interaction energy , and entropy per site .
the equilibrium density profile @xmath48 and the profiles of the thermodynamic potentials depend on temperature , crowding , interaction , and environment via @xmath52 , @xmath30 , @xmath21 , and @xmath20 , respectively .
the cell occupancy ( mass density ) is obtained from the rod occupancy ( number density ) via @xmath53    in homogeneous systems the pressure @xmath54 follows rigorously from the free - energy density @xmath55 via @xmath56 . a natural extension of this relation to systems with external potential
has the form @xmath57+\sum_{j = i-\sigma+1}^i \bar{n}_j\frac{\partial f_i[\bar{\mathbf{n}}]}{\partial \bar{n}_j}\,.\end{aligned}\ ] ] and produces pressure profiles on a microscopic length scale . however , there is no guarantee that the pressure thus derived coincides with the average microscopic pressure as commonly defined via the pair - distribution function .
more on this question follows in secs .
[ sec : meth - loca ] and [ sec : grav - micro ] .
exact profiles for @xmath58 and @xmath59 for arbitrary external potentials and interactions limited to hardcore repulsion on the lattice are calculated by the method introduced in appendix [ sec : appb ] .
for this comparative study of methods we need a continuum description for rod positions on a microscopic length scale used in the dft approach ( sec .
[ sec : meth - exac ] ) that carries over naturally to the mesoscopic length scale used in any of the eos methods , specifically the sivp approach ( sec .
[ sec : meth - eosm ] ) .
this continuum description of the lattice system is unrelated to the continuum limit .
we replace each lattice site @xmath60 with the interval @xmath61 across one cell ( of unit cross section ) , and we define the interaction potential @xmath62 and external potential @xmath63 by setting @xmath64 and @xmath65 .
the first - neighbor restriction for the interaction potential becomes @xmath66 for @xmath67 .
the local coverage at equilibrium of this interval allows us to define a number density by the piecewise continuous function @xmath68 for a homogeneous situation we have @xmath69 .    from any density profile
@xmath70 we can calculate the associated pressure profiles @xmath71 by invoking the balance between internal and external forces at thermodynamic equilibrium @xcite , @xmath72 where @xmath73 is the external force field . in ( [ eq : pressure - density - relation ] )
makes @xmath70 dimensionless , consistent with ( [ eq : rho - dft ] ) . ] integration of this differential equation yields @xmath74 in some applications the reference pressure @xmath75 is known , e.g. via the weight of the rods in a uniform gravitational field .
in other cases it can be determined from the average number @xmath76 of rods , which we know from summing @xmath77 over all sites , by using the normalization relation @xmath78 if @xmath79 then we can use @xmath80/\partial { x_0}$ ] .
if the rods are only subject to hardcore repulsion we can use the fact that at the system boundaries we have kinematic pressure @xmath81 ( sec .  [ sec : meth - loca ] ) . in sec .
[ sec : grav - dft ] we compare profiles inferred from ( [ eq : pressure - dft - direct2 ] ) with profiles calculated from eq .
( [ eq : pressure - profile - dft ] ) .
if one assumes that the eos of a homogeneous system remains valid in a corresponding inhomogeneous system on a coarse - grained local scale in the presence of external potentials , the balance equation ( [ eq : pressure - density - relation ] ) is sufficient to determine density and pressure profiles .
depending on the circumstances we use ( [ eq : pressure - density - relation ] ) to calculate the functions @xmath71 and @xmath82 or the functions @xmath70 and @xmath83 .
in the former case we have an eos in the form @xmath84 and solve ( [ eq : pressure - density - relation ] ) by separating variables @xmath54 and @xmath85 : @xmath86 where @xmath87 is determined by one of the conditions stated in sec .
[ sec : meth - coar ] . in the latter case
we proceed analogously via separation of variables @xmath88 and @xmath85 .
the eos method is particularly useful if long - range interactions are present . for such cases
an exact dft calculation of density profiles tends to be be impracticable and calculations based on recursion relation for partition functions @xcite are cumbersome . for long - range first - neighbor interactions , the sivp method @xcite provides a user - friendly way to derive the eos .
the microstates are encoded in a sequence of @xmath89 vacancies of size @xmath90 @xmath91 between consecutive rods , @xmath76 in number .
summing over all microstates means summing over all size combinations of @xmath89 vacancies .
this sum is free of constraints .
the interaction energy of first - neighbor rods at distance @xmath90 is equivalent to part of the excitation energy @xmath92 of the vacancies , @xmath93 where @xmath94 .
the vacancies themselves are free of interaction energies and form a set of polydisperse quasiparticles with generalized exclusion statistics .
their statistical mechanics has been worked out in @xcite building on a host of foundational work @xcite .
this treatment produces exact results for any thermodynamic quantity of interest for spatially homogeneous situations .
the free enthalpy @xmath95 per site is given by @xmath96 from which other thermodynamic quantities are inferred via the auxiliary quantities @xcite @xmath97^\gamma e^{-\beta\epsilon_m(p)}.\ ] ] this includes the mean size @xmath98 of vacant cells @xmath99 from which the eos is obtained in the form @xmath100      in continuum mechanics , the ` microscopic ' pressure is defined as one third of the ( negative ) trace of the microscopic stress tensor and the divergence of this tensor determines the time evolution of the momentum density caused by the internal interaction forces . in one - dimension ,
the local stress tensor reduces to the microscopic pressure @xmath101 and the equation of motion for the momentum density @xmath102 becomes @xmath103 how statistical mechanical expressions for the local pressure @xmath104 in thermodynamic equilibrium ( or the equilibrium - averaged microscopic stress tensor ) are obtained when starting with these euler equations of continuum mechanics was first studied by irving and kirkwood in 1950 @xcite . in appendix
[ sec : appa ] we have adapted the elegant derivation by lutsko @xcite to one dimension , which for pair interactions yields @xmath105 here @xmath106 is the pair distribution function and @xmath107 the force of a particle at position @xmath108 on a particle at position @xmath109 . the first term represents the kinematic pressure and the second the interaction pressure .
we set @xmath110 throughout sec .
[ sec : meth - loca ] .    for hard rod systems ,
the interaction potential @xmath111 is infinite for @xmath112 .
this singularity can be accounted for in eq .
( [ eq : p - rho2 ] ) by considering a modified continuous potential @xmath113 , which agrees with @xmath114 for @xmath115 while for @xmath116 it is given by @xmath117 for @xmath118 and @xmath119(r-\sigma)$ ] for @xmath120 .
after inserting the corresponding force in eq .
( [ eq : p - rho2 ] ) the pressure is obtained by taking the limit @xmath121 , @xmath122 . for non - interacting hard rods ( @xmath123 for @xmath115 ) in particular , this procedure yields @xmath124 because @xmath125 for @xmath126 or @xmath127 , the range of integration in the second term extends from zero to @xmath85 for @xmath128 , and from @xmath129 to @xmath130 for @xmath131 .
this means that the interaction pressure at @xmath132 and @xmath133 ( the effective system boundary ) vanishes .
accordingly , the local pressure at these boundary points is just given by the kinematic pressure , as earlier pointed out by ibsen _
@xcite , who derived eqs .
( [ eq : p - rho2 ] ) and ( [ eq : p - rho2-non - interacting ] ) based on the approach in @xcite . for interacting hard rods ( @xmath134 for @xmath115 ) ,
the interaction pressure generally does not vanish at the system boundaries .
it is interesting to note that equating the expressions for the local pressure in eqs .
( [ eq : pressure - profile - dft ] ) and ( [ eq : p - rho2 ] ) [ or eq .  ( [ eq : p - rho2-non - interacting ] ) ] yields an integral equation connecting the pair distribution with the density . this could in principle be used to determine @xmath135 .
alternatively , the pair distribution can be obtained by solving the inhomogeneous ornstein - zernike relation with the direct correlation function given by the second order derivatives of the density functional . for hard rods with first - neighbor interactions ,
many - particle - density distribution functions are most conveniently obtained by employing recursion relations for partition functions , both for continuum @xcite and for lattice systems @xcite .
we note that for the latter , the integrals for the interaction pressure in eqs .
( [ eq : p - rho2 ] ) and ( [ eq : p - rho2-non - interacting ] ) can be replaced by corresponding sums ( appendix [ sec : appc ] ) .
consider a semi - infinite vertical column of cells numbered @xmath136 from the bottom up . a uniform gravitational field @xmath137 acts on rods of mass @xmath138 .
we use it here to represent any linear potential .
we begin with non - interacting rods of size @xmath8 on a lattice and then take the continuum limit .
results from sivp operating on a mesoscopic length scale are compared with those from dft operating on a microscopic length scale .
pressure profiles on a microscopic length scale obtained from dft via ( [ eq : pressure - dft - direct2 ] ) are then compared with average microscopic pressure profiles inferred via ( [ eq : p - rho2-non - interacting ] ) .
finally , we discuss some effects of repulsive contact interaction as made manifest in one or the other method . for the sake of brevity we limit the discussion to one simple case study of each approach .
they can both be adapted to different applications .
the gravitational potential to be used in ( [ eq : pressure - density - relation ] ) is @xmath139 convenient scaled variables for position , pressure , and temperature in this application are @xmath140 where @xmath141 is the length of all @xmath76 rods stacked up in a solid column .
the pressure at @xmath142 is @xmath143 , independent of @xmath32 .
the thermal energy @xmath144 is measured in units of the work @xmath145 required to lift this weight a distance equal to the size of one rod .    the sivp analysis ( sec .
[ sec : meth - eosm ] ) starts from the expression for the density of vacant cells , @xmath146^{-1},\ ] ] derived in @xcite from ( [ eq : m - sivp ] ) .
the scaled mass density ( volume fraction ) inferred from ( [ eq : eos - sivp ] ) then reads @xmath147 performing the integral ( [ eq : p - from - eos - method ] ) with ( [ eq:10 ] ) and ( [ eq:22 ] ) yields the following equation for the pressure profile @xmath148 the density profile follows from ( [ eq:22 ] ) by substitution .     on a lattice and the dashed lines rods ( of any size ) in a continuum.,title="fig:",width=162 ]   on a lattice and the dashed lines rods ( of any size ) in a continuum.,title="fig:",width=162 ]    the solid curves in fig .
[ fig : fig1 ] show the profiles @xmath149 and @xmath150 at various values of @xmath151 for rods of size @xmath152 .
the variation of pressure with height crosses over from hydrostatic to atmospheric with increasing temperature .
the density profile is rectangular in the low - temperature limit and varies like @xmath153 at @xmath154 .
these profiles do not vary much with the rod size @xmath8 when expressed by the scaled quantities ( [ eq:1 ] ) . in the limit @xmath4 , @xmath3 with
@xmath6 fixed , we have a system of rods of size @xmath5 and mass @xmath138 in a continuum .
the continuum versions of ( [ eq:22 ] ) and ( [ eq:23 ] ) read @xmath155 respectively .
the pressure and mass density profiles in the continuum are shown as dashed curves in fig .
[ fig : fig1 ] .      on the length scale of single rods
additional features , not resolved by any eos method including sivp , emerge in the profiles for @xmath156 when analyzed via dft .
we write @xmath157 where @xmath158 is the position of the center of the lowest cell occupied by a rod .
the free energy functional ( [ eq : freeenergy - dft ] ) with no interaction except hardcore repulsion acquires the form ( [ eq : b1 ] ) and the density profile of rods for any given @xmath20 are the solutions of the coupled equations ( [ eq : b2 ] ) . here , for the linear potential ( [ eq:102 ] ) , we set @xmath159 in all expressions imported from appendix  [ sec : appb ] .
we first examine the case @xmath152 .
the solution ( [ eq : b4 ] ) is constructed from an exponential function as follows : @xmath160 where @xmath161 and the average number @xmath162 of rods is controlled by the fugacity @xmath163 , where @xmath164 is the scaled chemical potential .
this dft result exactly reproduces the functional dependence of @xmath165 on @xmath166 obtained via sivp and given by ( [ eq:22 ] ) with ( [ eq:23 ] ) for @xmath152 if we use ( [ eq:101 ] ) and set @xmath167 the results from both methods are fully consistent .
the sivp solution remains exact even for small numbers of rods .
there exist no microscopic features in the density profile that sivp does not resolve .
now we turn to the case @xmath168 , where the microscopic length scale does indeed reveal additional structures in the various profiles .
these structures are encoded in eqs .
( [ eq : b5 ] ) , which for slowly varying profiles we expand into the form , @xmath169,\ ] ] and note that the first correction is of second order .
the leading term alone leads to the density profile , @xmath170 which coincides with ( [ eq:22 ] ) and ( [ eq:23 ] ) for @xmath168 if we set @xmath171 thus full consistency between the two approaches is established on the mesoscopic length scale .
finding the microscopic structures in the density profiles of rods and mass requires that we solve eqs .
( [ eq : b5 ] ) and then use ( [ eq:101 ] ) instead of eq .  ( [ eq:34 ] ) .
the solution as derived in appendix  [ sec : appb ] reads @xmath172 with the @xmath173 determined recursively from @xmath174     in a uniform gravitational field at different temperatures .
the solid curves represent solutions of ( [ eq:22 ] ) and ( [ eq:23 ] ) as predicted by sivp for a system with @xmath175 .
the @xmath58-data on the left ( circles ) originate from ( [ eq:113 ] ) with @xmath176 from ( [ eq:35 ] ) and @xmath177 from ( [ eq:19 ] ) with @xmath178 .
these data are transcribed into the circles on the right via ( [ eq:101 ] ) and into the circles of panel ( g ) via ( [ eq:305]).,title="fig:",width=162 ]   in a uniform gravitational field at different temperatures .
the solid curves represent solutions of ( [ eq:22 ] ) and ( [ eq:23 ] ) as predicted by sivp for a system with @xmath175 .
the @xmath58-data on the left ( circles ) originate from ( [ eq:113 ] ) with @xmath176 from ( [ eq:35 ] ) and @xmath177 from ( [ eq:19 ] ) with @xmath178 .
these data are transcribed into the circles on the right via ( [ eq:101 ] ) and into the circles of panel ( g ) via ( [ eq:305]).,title="fig:",width=162 ]   in a uniform gravitational field at different temperatures .
the solid curves represent solutions of ( [ eq:22 ] ) and ( [ eq:23 ] ) as predicted by sivp for a system with @xmath175 .
the @xmath58-data on the left ( circles ) originate from ( [ eq:113 ] ) with @xmath176 from ( [ eq:35 ] ) and @xmath177 from ( [ eq:19 ] ) with @xmath178 .
these data are transcribed into the circles on the right via ( [ eq:101 ] ) and into the circles of panel ( g ) via ( [ eq:305]).,title="fig:",width=162 ]   in a uniform gravitational field at different temperatures .
the solid curves represent solutions of ( [ eq:22 ] ) and ( [ eq:23 ] ) as predicted by sivp for a system with @xmath175 .
the @xmath58-data on the left ( circles ) originate from ( [ eq:113 ] ) with @xmath176 from ( [ eq:35 ] ) and @xmath177 from ( [ eq:19 ] ) with @xmath178 .
these data are transcribed into the circles on the right via ( [ eq:101 ] ) and into the circles of panel ( g ) via ( [ eq:305]).,title="fig:",width=162 ]   in a uniform gravitational field at different temperatures .
the solid curves represent solutions of ( [ eq:22 ] ) and ( [ eq:23 ] ) as predicted by sivp for a system with @xmath175 .
the @xmath58-data on the left ( circles ) originate from ( [ eq:113 ] ) with @xmath176 from ( [ eq:35 ] ) and @xmath177 from ( [ eq:19 ] ) with @xmath178 .
these data are transcribed into the circles on the right via ( [ eq:101 ] ) and into the circles of panel ( g ) via ( [ eq:305]).,title="fig:",width=162 ]   in a uniform gravitational field at different temperatures .
the solid curves represent solutions of ( [ eq:22 ] ) and ( [ eq:23 ] ) as predicted by sivp for a system with @xmath175 .
the @xmath58-data on the left ( circles ) originate from ( [ eq:113 ] ) with @xmath176 from ( [ eq:35 ] ) and @xmath177 from ( [ eq:19 ] ) with @xmath178 .
these data are transcribed into the circles on the right via ( [ eq:101 ] ) and into the circles of panel ( g ) via ( [ eq:305]).,title="fig:",width=162 ]   in a uniform gravitational field at different temperatures .
the solid curves represent solutions of ( [ eq:22 ] ) and ( [ eq:23 ] ) as predicted by sivp for a system with @xmath175 .
the @xmath58-data on the left ( circles ) originate from ( [ eq:113 ] ) with @xmath176 from ( [ eq:35 ] ) and @xmath177 from ( [ eq:19 ] ) with @xmath178 .
these data are transcribed into the circles on the right via ( [ eq:101 ] ) and into the circles of panel ( g ) via ( [ eq:305]).,title="fig:",width=162 ]    the circles in the panels on the left in fig .
[ fig : fig9 ] are derived from ( [ eq:113 ] ) .
the probability @xmath58 that a rod occupies cells @xmath60 and @xmath179 varies with index @xmath60 in a manner that reflects the combined effects of the hardcore exclusion interaction between rods and the presence of a hard floor @xmath180 .
the spatial oscillations are mild at high @xmath32 and discernible only very close to the floor .
as @xmath32 is lowered , the amplitude becomes stronger and the range wider . in the limit
@xmath181 the @xmath58 strictly alternate between one and zero , reflecting a compact stack of rods
.    when transcribed via ( [ eq:101 ] ) to the mass density , the wall effect is not nearly as strong .
the evidence is represented by the circles in the panels on the right , where we set @xmath182 for the discrete data and @xmath166 from ( [ eq:1 ] ) for the curves . at high @xmath32 the effect is still strongest in the immediate vicinity of the floor but that is no longer the case at the lowest @xmath32 used in fig .  [
fig : fig9 ] . at @xmath183
the effect disappears altogether .
the local pressure predicted by dft as inferred from ( [ eq : pressure - dft - direct2 ] ) with the @xmath58 from ( [ eq : b2 ] ) substituted into the free - energy functional ( [ eq : b1 ] ) becomes @xmath184 with @xmath59 from ( [ eq:101 ] ) .    in panel ( g ) of fig .
[ fig : fig9 ] we show the pressure profiles thus obtained from the density data of panels ( a)-(f ) .
the profiles are monotonically decreasing from @xmath185 .
remarkably , the wild oscillations of the @xmath58 are almost completely smoothed by ( [ eq:305 ] ) .
however , there does exist a systematic albeit small deviation between the dft and sivp pressure profiles .
the dft pressure profile is closer to but not identical with the true microscopic pressure as will be further discussed in sec .
[ sec : grav - micro ] .
the agreement of the dft and sivp approaches on the mesoscopic length scale defined earlier is underlined by expressions ( [ eq:19 ] ) and ( [ eq:32 ] ) for @xmath152 and by expressions ( [ eq:34 ] ) and ( [ eq:35 ] ) for @xmath168 .
it can further be shown that for any @xmath8 the density @xmath150 determined by ( [ eq:22 ] ) and ( [ eq:23 ] ) is the solution of a polynomial equation of order @xmath8 . likewise , the probabilities @xmath58 at @xmath186 inferred from ( [ eq : b2 ] ) with all @xmath77 within the square brackets set equal to each other is also the solution of a polynomial equation of order @xmath8 .
the control variables are @xmath151 , @xmath76 in the first polynomial equation ( canonical ensemble ) whereas they are @xmath151 and @xmath176 in the second polynomial equation ( grandcanonical ensemble ) .
the two polynomial equations are equivalent if we set @xmath187 the agreement between dft and sivp on the mesoscopic length scale also extends to the pressure profiles . from ( [ eq:305 ] ) with @xmath188 we infer @xmath189 which is equivalent to ( [ eq:22 ] ) .
the microscopic features in the density profile remain conspicuous for @xmath190 .
the oscillations that are superimposed on profile predicted by sivp are characterized by a ` wavelength ' proportional to @xmath8 .
such profiles are readily produced from ( [ eq : b15 ] ) and ( [ eq : b16 ] ) .
the exact hard - wall effects for rods of arbitrary size @xmath8 will be investigated in sec .  [
sec : ster ] .
soft walls as realized in power - law traps also produce structures on a microscopic length scale .
some examples will be investigated in sec .
[ sec : powe ] .      the average local microscopic pressure @xmath191 as inferred via ( [ eq : p - rho2-non - interacting ] ) from the pair distribution function by the method presented in appendix  [ sec : appc ] has two parts : a kinematic pressure and an interaction pressure ( in a formal sense ) . in fig .
[ fig : microscopic_pres ] we show the profiles of both parts and their sum for rods of size @xmath192 at low temperature @xmath193 .
both parts show strong oscillations that are somewhat out of phase .
these oscillations are strongly attenuated with distance from the hard floor .
they quickly become imperceptible with rising @xmath32 ( see fig .
[ fig : microscpic_dft_pres ] ) .
the non - monotonic features of @xmath191 remain totally unresolved in the eos pressure profiles discussed earlier but are partially resolved by the dft pressure profiles as illustrated in fig .
[ fig : microscpic_dft_pres ] . at high @xmath151
the two profiles are virtually identical and equal to the sivp profile . at low @xmath151
, the additional @xmath191 oscillations are reproduced by dft with remarkable accuracy albeit not exactly .
is not equal the total weight of the rods but it has the form @xmath194 , as can be shown from ( [ eq : part_fct_explicit ] ) , where @xmath195 is the pressure at the top of the system .
with increasing system size @xmath195 approaches zero . ]     for rods of size @xmath192 at low @xmath151 as inferred from ( [ eq : p - rho2-non - interacting ] ) and the pair distribution function as derived in appendix [ sec : appc].,width=264 ]    ) in conjunction with ( [ eq : micscopic_pressure ] ) ( circles connected by dashed lines ) and calculated from ( [ eq : pressure - dft - direct2 ] ) ( solid lines ) for high @xmath151 ( left ) and low @xmath151 ( right).,title="fig:",width=158 ] ) in conjunction with ( [ eq : micscopic_pressure ] ) ( circles connected by dashed lines ) and calculated from ( [ eq : pressure - dft - direct2 ] ) ( solid lines ) for high @xmath151 ( left ) and low @xmath151 ( right).,title="fig:",width=158 ]      consider a contact interaction potential @xmath196 that is attractive for @xmath197 and repulsive for @xmath198 .
as inferred from @xcite , the contact interaction changes the local density of vacant cells from ( [ eq:21 ] ) to @xmath199},\ ] ] where we have introduced the variable @xmath200 and the scaled interaction @xmath201 in addition to the scaled variables ( [ eq:1 ] ) .
the mass density @xmath165 is inferred from ( [ eq : eos - sivp ] ) .
the integral ( [ eq : p - from - eos - method ] ) can still be evaluated exactly and yields the pressure profile , @xmath202 in generalization of ( [ eq:23 ] ) .
an attractive contact interaction affects the profiles in a way similar to what a drop in temperature does ( see fig .  [
fig : fig1 ] ) .
no significant additional features make their appearance .
repulsion is more interesting in that respect as documented in fig .
[ fig : fig5 ] for @xmath152 .    ) in a uniform gravitational field at temperatures @xmath203 and for ( repulsive ) contact interaction @xmath204 .
panel ( c ) shows the @xmath205 versus @xmath166 data near @xmath180 .
the dashed line has slope @xmath206.,title="fig:",width=162 ] ) in a uniform gravitational field at temperatures @xmath203 and for ( repulsive ) contact interaction @xmath204 .
panel ( c ) shows the @xmath205 versus @xmath166 data near @xmath180 .
the dashed line has slope @xmath206.,title="fig:",width=162 ] ) in a uniform gravitational field at temperatures @xmath203 and for ( repulsive ) contact interaction @xmath204 .
panel ( c ) shows the @xmath205 versus @xmath166 data near @xmath180 .
the dashed line has slope @xmath206.,title="fig:",width=162 ]    the configuration of rods becomes stratified at low temperature .
the density profile now exhibits an additional layer of intermediate density .
the width of that layer increases with the strength of the repulsion .
the ( largely hydrostatic ) pressure profile acquires different slopes inside different layers .
these profiles depend systematically on @xmath8 without producing any additional features . from @xcite
we know that the effects of attractive or repulsive contact interactions of finite strength fade away completely in the continuum limit .
one subtle feature of note concerns the initial slope of the hydrostatic pressure as presented in panel ( a ) of fig .  [ fig : fig1 ] and then again in panel ( c ) on a much expanded scale .
what in panel ( a ) looks like a clean change between slope @xmath207 for interaction strengths @xmath208 and slope @xmath209 for stronger contact repulsion , @xmath210 is , at very small @xmath166 , a two - step change with slope @xmath206 at @xmath211 in the middle .
this asymptotic slope is evident in the expansion of ( [ eq:38 ] ) : @xmath212+\mathrm{o}(\hat{z}^{2}).\end{aligned}\ ] ]      here we wish to demonstrate how a repulsive contact force of infinite strength effectively increases the size of rods .
the inclusion of a scaled contact potential @xmath213 generalizes ( [ eq : b1 ] ) to @xmath214 as shown in @xcite , where the contact interaction @xmath215 is contained in the correlators , @xmath216 @xmath217 that appear in the first three terms of ( [ eq:43 ] ) .
the last two terms reflect the hardcore repulsion .
the metamorphosis of hard rods of one size into hard rods of a bigger size is most transparent if we consider the case @xmath152 and compare the limits @xmath218 and @xmath219 .
the extremum condition ( [ eq : structure - equations ] ) applied to ( [ eq:43 ] ) leads to the following set of relations that determine the density profile @xmath220 for external potential @xmath20 and fugacity @xmath176 : @xmath221[\bar{n}_i - c_{i-1,i}][\bar{n}_i - c_{i , i+1}]}{\bar{n}_i[1-\bar{n}_{i-1}-\bar{n}_{i } + c_{i-1,i}][1-\bar{n}_i-\bar{n}_{i+1 } + c_{i , i+1}]},\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath222 where @xmath223 and @xmath224 . for @xmath225
we have @xmath226 and ( [ eq:46 ] ) reduces to @xmath227 whereas for @xmath228 we have @xmath229 and ( [ eq:46 ] ) becomes @xmath230 representing rods of size @xmath168 with only hardcore repulsion . in the application to a uniform gravitational field , ( [ eq:48 ] ) is equivalent to ( [ eq:19 ] ) and ( [ eq:49 ] ) is equivalent to ( [ eq : b5 ] ) .    the sivp approach of sec .
[ sec : grav - sivp - cont ] describes the same crossover from rods of size @xmath8 to rods of size @xmath231 under a repulsive contact interaction of increasing strength . the pressure profile ( [ eq:38 ] )
evaluated for @xmath232 and any @xmath8 reproduces ( [ eq:23 ] ) .
when the same expression is evaluated for @xmath233 it connects again with ( [ eq:23 ] ) but now for @xmath231 provided the scaled variables are properly adjusted .
optical or magnetic traps of several different designs for atomic or molecular gases produce wells with a range of profiles .
how does the pressure at the center of the trap vary with temperature ?
how does the shape of the trap potential affect the profiles of density and pressure ?
power - law traps are well - suited for our two approaches and can illuminate these questions with answers from an exact analysis .      in this application we consider an infinite row of cells numbered @xmath234 at positions @xmath235 .
the rods are confined to a region centered at @xmath132 by the symmetric power - law potential @xmath236 with @xmath237 representing a depth and @xmath238 representing ( at least for @xmath239 ) a width of the trap .
the analysis proceeds as in sec .
[ sec : grav - sivp ] . expression ( [ eq:22 ] ) remains unchanged .
however , the pressure profile is now determined by the relation @xmath240 where , in addition to @xmath205 and @xmath151 from ( [ eq:1 ] ) , we use the scaled variables @xmath241 a solid stack of rods extends out to @xmath242 and the pressure at the center becomes @xmath243 . in the continuum limit , @xmath4 , @xmath3 with @xmath6 , eqs .
( [ eq:22 ] ) and ( [ eq:27 ] ) turn into @xmath244    one additional relation is needed to bring closure to ( [ eq:22 ] ) and ( [ eq:27 ] ) , namely @xmath245 reflecting mass conservation .
the pressure @xmath246 at @xmath247 can be determined from this relation .
for the two extreme rod sizes we thus obtain @xmath248 @xmath249^{\frac{1-\alpha}{\alpha}}\!\!\!=1\quad   ( \sigma=\infty),\ ] ] where @xmath250 is the fermi - dirac function .
the rods remain confined at any finite temperature : we have @xmath251 if @xmath252 for any @xmath253 .
the limit @xmath254 , representing a trap of width @xmath255 with rigid walls , is subtle .
relation ( [ eq:303 ] ) reduces to @xmath256 we then have @xmath257 inside the trap , with a uniform density , @xmath258 .
we thus recover the familiar eos @xmath259 of the ideal lattice gas .    the limit @xmath260 yields @xmath261 and the profiles for pressure and density are @xmath262 respectively .
if @xmath239 @xmath263 the pressure @xmath246 at the center of the trap increases ( decreases ) with @xmath151 rising from zero . for the linear potential @xmath264 , which is equivalent to the case of the uniform gravitational field ( sec .
[ sec : grav - sivp ] ) , we have @xmath261 for all @xmath151 .    in fig .
[ fig : fig3 ] we show pressure and density profiles for the two extreme rod sizes in two different power - law potentials .
the shape of one potential @xmath265 is concave and that of the other @xmath266 convex .
corresponding profiles for a linear potential @xmath264 have already been shown in fig .
[ fig : fig1 ] albeit on a somewhat different scale .
( top ) and @xmath267 ( bottom ) at temperatures @xmath268 for rods of sizes @xmath152 ( solid curves ) and @xmath269 ( dashed curves).,title="fig:",width=162 ]   ( top ) and @xmath267 ( bottom ) at temperatures @xmath268 for rods of sizes @xmath152 ( solid curves ) and @xmath269 ( dashed curves).,title="fig:",width=162 ]   ( top ) and @xmath267 ( bottom ) at temperatures @xmath268 for rods of sizes @xmath152 ( solid curves ) and @xmath269 ( dashed curves).,title="fig:",width=162 ]   ( top ) and @xmath267 ( bottom ) at temperatures @xmath268 for rods of sizes @xmath152 ( solid curves ) and @xmath269 ( dashed curves).,title="fig:",width=162 ]    the opposite @xmath151-dependence of the pressure near the center of the trap is evident .
the curves at the lowest temperature are close to the @xmath270 profiles ( [ eq:50 ] ) . naturally , the pressure decrease with rising @xmath151 in for @xmath271 has a much larger effect on the density than does the pressure increase for @xmath267 .
another noteworthy feature is that the difference in profile between the lattice system and the continuum system is much more pronounced for the convex potential than for the concave potential .      in sec .
[ sec : grav - dft ] we have already identified some hard - floor effects in the form of spatially attenuated oscillations in the density profiles @xmath58 and @xmath59 of rods and mass , respectively . we found ( in fig .  [ fig : fig9 ] ) that the effect is very conspicuous in the former and partially averaged out in the latter
. a more systematic analysis of hard - wall effects for rods of various sizes on the lattice and for rods in a continuum will be presented in sec .
[ sec : ster ] .     and
mass @xmath59 for rods of size @xmath168 in a harmonic trap @xmath266 and in a power - law trap with firmer walls @xmath272 . in both traps
we use @xmath273 .
all data are for @xmath274 .
the chemical potential @xmath275 has the values ( a ) 1.0 , ( b ) 1.55 , ( c ) 0.3 , ( d ) 0.5.,title="fig:",width=162 ]   and mass @xmath59 for rods of size @xmath168 in a harmonic trap @xmath266 and in a power - law trap with firmer walls @xmath272 . in both traps
we use @xmath273 .
all data are for @xmath274 .
the chemical potential @xmath275 has the values ( a ) 1.0 , ( b ) 1.55 , ( c ) 0.3 , ( d ) 0.5.,title="fig:",width=162 ]   and mass @xmath59 for rods of size @xmath168 in a harmonic trap @xmath266 and in a power - law trap with firmer walls @xmath272 . in both traps
we use @xmath273 .
all data are for @xmath274 .
the chemical potential @xmath275 has the values ( a ) 1.0 , ( b ) 1.55 , ( c ) 0.3 , ( d ) 0.5.,title="fig:",width=162 ]   and mass @xmath59 for rods of size @xmath168 in a harmonic trap @xmath266 and in a power - law trap with firmer walls @xmath272 . in both traps
we use @xmath273 .
all data are for @xmath274 .
the chemical potential @xmath275 has the values ( a ) 1.0 , ( b ) 1.55 , ( c ) 0.3 , ( d ) 0.5.,title="fig:",width=162 ]    here we briefly examine the question whether the soft walls of power - law traps also produce patterns of spatial density oscillations .
we begin with rods of size @xmath168 . in fig .  [
fig : fig15 ] we compare data for traps with walls of two different degrees of softness .
these data are produced by using the potential ( [ eq:26 ] ) with @xmath276 and calculating the profiles from ( [ eq : b10 ] ) and ( [ eq:101 ] ) .
we use @xmath277 with @xmath278 and a shift that positions the rod with index @xmath279 at the center of the trap .
the harmonic trap is , in some sense , the smoothest form of confinement .
we see in panels ( a ) and ( b ) that oscillations do make their appearance in the @xmath58-profiles .
the amplitudes of these oscillations tend to be rather uniform across the region where the rod population is significant .
the general trend is that the amplitudes increase with increasing chemical potential @xmath280 or decreasing temperature @xmath281 .
superimposed on this systematic trend is an oscillatory dependence on @xmath275 .
the data in the panels ( a ) and ( b ) are for two successive values near maximum and minimum amplitude of @xmath58-oscillations .
the minimum amplitude is almost imperceptible .
we also note that in the @xmath59-profiles these oscillations are almost completely averaged out .    increasing the stiffness of the trap walls produces no dramatic changes .
the dependence on @xmath275 of the spatial oscillations remains qualitatively similar .
the amplitudes still oscillate as @xmath275 is varied .
the data in the panels ( c ) and ( d ) are for @xmath282 and for values of @xmath275 near successive maximum and minimum amplitude .
one systematic trend as the trap wall becomes increasingly firm is that the spatial oscillations become weaker near the center of the trap and stronger near the walls .
this trend is visible between the data in panels ( a ) and ( c ) , for example .
we shall see in sec .
[ sec : ster ] that the oscillatory dependence of the amplitudes on @xmath275 disappears when the walls become hard @xmath283 .    in fig .
[ fig : fig16 ] we show some data for rods of size @xmath284 in a trap with relatively stiff walls @xmath272 and twice the width of the one used before .
the calculations are based on eqs .
( [ eq : b15 ] ) and ( [ eq : b16 ] ) .
here we only show data of the @xmath58-profiles for two conditions .     for rods of size @xmath284 in a power - law trap with @xmath282 .
we use @xmath285 .
all data are for @xmath274 .
the scaled chemical potentials are ( a ) @xmath286 and ( b ) @xmath287 . in each plot the second and third data sets are vertically displaced by 0.2 and 0.4 , respectively.,title="fig:",width=162 ]   for rods of size @xmath284 in a power - law trap with @xmath282 .
we use @xmath285 .
all data are for @xmath274 .
the scaled chemical potentials are ( a ) @xmath286 and ( b ) @xmath287 . in each plot the second and third data sets are vertically displaced by 0.2 and 0.4 , respectively.,title="fig:",width=162 ]    the average numbers of rods in the data of panel ( a ) are such that the rods easily fit into the space at low potential energy .
we observe significant oscillations with a period near but not exactly three .
a small change in chemical potential produces shifts in the oscillatory patterns and variations in the average amplitude .
we also observe slightly larger amplitudes near the wall compared to the center of the trap . at significantly smaller values of @xmath162
the oscillations are much weaker .
the data in panel ( b ) are for circumstances where the rods are squeezed into the trap . here
the rod positions are more correlated .
the oscillations are closer to period three .
we also observe the oscillatory dependence of the amplitude on @xmath275 .
for some values there are one or two dominant configurations , producing high amplitude . for other values , there are three configuration that have very similar statistical weight , producing low amplitude .
microscopic density profiles of rods or other particles with shapes near hard walls are relevant in the contexts of granular matter , porous solids , and zeolites among others .
robledo and rowlinson @xcite studied the effects of confinement on hard rods in a continuum .
davis @xcite extended that study to include first - neighbor interactions between rods .
more recently , ibsen _ et al _ @xcite reported a general and exact solution for hard rods confined by a gravitational field and a hard floor . a computer simulation study of mehrotra _
et al _ @xcite of hard spheres under the same confinement in 3d produces similar results .
here we pick up threads from secs .
[ sec : grav - dft ] and  [ sec : powe - soft - wall ] to investigate steric wall effects of hard rods on a lattice .
one goal is to showcase the versatility of the method of analysis presented in appendix  [ sec : appb ] and to establish how it connects to the continuum analysis familiar from previous work .
we consider a box with rigid walls and investigate the oscillations in the density profiles produced by the steric interactions between rods of size @xmath156 .
the effects of a single wall , relevant in sufficiently wide boxes , can be determined analytically for rods of any size on the lattice and for rods in the continuum .
two walls within the distance of a certain coherence length affect the density profile from opposite sides .
that coherence length is shown to grow with average density .
we combine exact analytic results with results from a rigorous recursive scheme .
we begin with the case of a semi - infinite box with one wall at @xmath288 and the other at @xmath289 populated by rods of size @xmath168 to an average mass density @xmath290 .
later we move the second wall to @xmath291 . for the semi - infinite box we have found an analytic solution .
the result ( with @xmath292 in the present context ) turns out to have a simple structure : @xmath293,\quad j=0,1,2,\ldots\ ] ] the relation between the fugacity and the average mass density is @xmath294.\ ] ] we have derived @xmath295 in ( [ eq:103 ] ) directly from ( [ eq : b11 ] ) with @xmath296 in the form of an infinite continued fraction that is readily evaluated .
the @xmath58 for @xmath297 then follow directly from ( [ eq : b5 ] ) .
the oscillations in the probability distribution @xmath58 of rod positions thus decay exponentially with distance from the wall .
the boundary coherence length , @xmath298 vanishes for @xmath299 and diverges for @xmath300 .
next we examine how the oscillations near the wall at @xmath288 are affected by the presence of a second wall at @xmath291 . for that purpose
we have solved ( [ eq : b10 ] ) with @xmath176 from ( [ eq:104 ] ) for comparison with the analytic solution ( [ eq:103 ] ) .
the results , shown in fig .  [ fig : fig12 ] , are almost indistinguishable for @xmath301 . here
the coherence length ( [ eq:106 ] ) is much smaller than the distance between the walls . at larger mass density
the two sets of results begin to deviate from each other as @xmath302 grows and reaches about half the wall - to - wall distance at @xmath303 .     with center at coordinate @xmath304 in a box of width @xmath305 .
full circles connected by lines : solution of ( [ eq : b10 ] ) .
open circles : result ( [ eq:103 ] ) for a box of infinite width with one wall at @xmath306.,title="fig:",width=162 ]   with center at coordinate @xmath304 in a box of width @xmath305 .
full circles connected by lines : solution of ( [ eq : b10 ] ) .
open circles : result ( [ eq:103 ] ) for a box of infinite width with one wall at @xmath306.,title="fig:",width=162 ]   with center at coordinate @xmath304 in a box of width @xmath305 .
full circles connected by lines : solution of ( [ eq : b10 ] ) .
open circles : result ( [ eq:103 ] ) for a box of infinite width with one wall at @xmath306.,title="fig:",width=162 ]   with center at coordinate @xmath304 in a box of width @xmath305 .
full circles connected by lines : solution of ( [ eq : b10 ] ) .
open circles : result ( [ eq:103 ] ) for a box of infinite width with one wall at @xmath306.,title="fig:",width=162 ]    the signature wall effect for @xmath168 manifests itself in the form of attenuated , period-2 spatial oscillations in the @xmath58 .
the exponential attenuation is governed by a coherence length that grows with the density of rods in the box . in the limit @xmath300
the oscillations persist across the box as expected .
we continue with the analysis of a system of rods of size @xmath307 subject to the potential @xmath308{0mm}{5 mm } \\ 0 & : ~ i>0 ,   \rule[-2mm]{0mm}{5 mm } \end{array } \right.\ ] ] representing a single rigid wall at @xmath279 .
we present the exact solution of eqs .
( [ eq : b2 ] ) adapted to this case , @xmath309
\prod\limits_{k = i}^{i+\sigma-1}\left[1-\!\!\!\sum\limits_{j = k-\sigma+1}^{k}\bar{n}_{j}\right]^{-1}\!\!\!.\ ] ] we have @xmath310 for @xmath311 and assume that far from the wall @xmath312 the @xmath58 approach uniformity , @xmath313 where @xmath290 is the mass density in the bulk ( average cell occupancy ) .
the fugacity , the only control variable aside from @xmath8 , depends on the asymptotic solution ( [ eq:116 ] ) as follows : @xmath314^{\sigma-1 } } { \big[1-\sigma \bar{n}^{(\mathrm{mes})}\big]^\sigma } , \quad 0<\bar{n}^{(\mathrm{mes})}<\frac{1}{\sigma}.\ ] ] next we convert ( [ eq:115 ] ) into a recursion relation that expresses the solution at a given site as a function of the solutions at the @xmath315 sites immediately to its left : @xmath316,\end{aligned}\ ] ] for @xmath317 and with @xmath176 from ( [ eq:117 ] ) .
this recursion relation depends on the @xmath315 parameters @xmath318 . assuming that the solution with asymptotics ( [ eq:116 ] ) is unique , these parameters can be found with a little guidance from ( [ eq:103 ] ) for the case @xmath168 .
they are @xmath319^{i-1 } } { \big[1-(\sigma-1)\bar{n}^{(\mathrm{mes})}\big]^i},\quad i=1,\ldots,\sigma-1.\ ] ]     ( big circles ) and @xmath320 ( small circles ) with first cell at position @xmath321 near a rigid wall at @xmath279.,title="fig:",width=162 ]   ( big circles ) and @xmath320 ( small circles ) with first cell at position @xmath321 near a rigid wall at @xmath279.,title="fig:",width=162 ]    in fig .
[ fig : figa1 ] we show data generated recursively from ( [ eq:118 ] ) for the scaled density @xmath322 versus the scaled position @xmath323 for rods of sizes @xmath324 and @xmath320 .
the latter size is meant to generate an impression of what to expect in the continuum limit .
the data suggest that the dominant wall effect manifests itself again in an attenuated spatial oscillation .
successive minima are approximately spaced by @xmath8 . only in the limit @xmath325 ,
when the attenuation disappears , are the oscillations locked into the wavelength @xmath8 .
this raises the interesting question , best analyzed in the continuum limit , what the spectrum of the wall oscillations is and how it depends on @xmath165 .
the continuum limit carried out for @xmath326 produces an exponential function as follows : @xmath327 this result can now be extended to @xmath328 by using a continuum version of the fugacity ( [ eq:117 ] ) , @xmath329 and a continuum version of ( [ eq:115 ] ) , @xmath330 where @xmath331 as derived percus @xcite . following vanderlick et al .
@xcite , we convert ( [ eq:122 ] ) and ( [ eq : a123 ] ) into difference - differential equation , @xmath332,\ ] ] @xmath333=\bar{\nu}(x)-\bar{\nu}(x+1),\ ] ] respectively .
next we integrate ( [ eq:124 ] ) and ( [ eq:125 ] ) in alternating sequence over intervals of unit length , using ( [ eq:120 ] ) and @xmath334 for @xmath126 .
we thus obtain the following exact , continuous , and piecewise analytic expression for @xmath335 on successive intervals @xmath336 : @xmath337 with asymptotic value , @xmath338far from the wall , approached more and more slowly with increasing average mass density @xmath165 .
the lattice dft analysis thus connects neatly with known results @xcite for monodisperse rods in a continuum .    in fig .
[ fig : figa2 ] we graphically compare this analytic solution ( [ eq:126 ] ) for the continuum model with the iterative solution ( [ eq:118 ] ) for the lattice model with @xmath339 .
the dominant feature of the curves is an attenuated spatial oscillation .
the singularities at @xmath340 become progressively weaker with increasing @xmath90 : @xmath341 is continuous at @xmath340 for @xmath342 . except for @xmath343 , the singularities do not coincide with the minima of @xmath344 .     on a lattice ( big circles ) and rods of ( scaled ) unit size in a continuum ( solid lines).,title="fig:",width=162 ]   on a lattice ( big circles ) and rods of ( scaled ) unit size in a continuum ( solid lines).,title="fig:",width=162 ]    .
( b ) spectrum ( [ eq:152 ] ) of the attenuated oscillation ( [ eq:126 ] ) at three values of @xmath165,title="fig:",width=162 ] .
( b ) spectrum ( [ eq:152 ] ) of the attenuated oscillation ( [ eq:126 ] ) at three values of @xmath165,title="fig:",width=162 ]    the limit @xmath300 @xmath345 is subtle . as the population of rods becomes more crowded , they begin to line up with increasing probability near the integer positions as illustrated in fig .
[ fig : fig17](a ) .
in the limit @xmath300 , maxima and minima approach the singularity values @xmath340 in pairs from opposite sides .
the maxima diverge and the minima approach zero .
the area under the curve between successive singularities approaches unity .
the shape of the curve approaches an of infinite height and unit width , effectively the function @xmath346    in fig .
[ fig : fig17](b ) we show the spectrum of the attenuated oscillation ( [ eq:126 ] ) , @xmath347\cos(qx).\ ] ] this quantity features a peak at wave number @xmath348 emerging from a broad and flat background .
the fourier transform ( [ eq:152 ] ) and the limit @xmath349 are not interchangeable operations .
with increasing @xmath165 the peak becomes taller and sharper as it moves toward commensurability at @xmath350 .
the dft mass density in the continuum , calculated from ( [ eq:126 ] ) via a continuum version of ( [ eq:101 ] ) , @xmath351 becomes @xmath352 on successive intervals @xmath336 . in fig .
[ fig : fig18 ] we show profiles of @xmath353 for the corresponding to the profiles of @xmath344 shown in figs .
[ fig : figa2 ] and [ fig : fig17 ] .
the oscillatory wall effects are somewhat milder in @xmath353 than in @xmath344 but still fairly conspicuous . in the limit @xmath349
the oscillations in @xmath344 diverge as in ( [ eq:151 ] ) but disappear in @xmath353 , which becomes constant .
.,title="fig:",width=162 ] .,title="fig:",width=162 ]
in this work we have investigated the equilibrium statistical mechanics of monodisperse hard rods confined by external potentials , producing characteristic spatial profiles of density and pressure .
the rods occupy @xmath8 consecutive cells of volume @xmath0 in a linear array .
the continuum limit is implemented as @xmath4 , @xmath3 with @xmath1 kept finite and nonzero .
the rods interact via hardcore exclusion forces .
contact forces have also been considered .
we have been employing two distinct methods of analysis , density functionals and generalized exclusion statistics , with partially overlapping domains of applicability and somewhat complementary strengths .
the usefulness , soundness , and consistency of the two approaches has been demonstrated in a series of applications that include confinement by rigid walls , gravity , and power - law traps .
we have shown that profiles of density , for example , exhibit characteristic features on a mesoscopic length scale that are reproduced identically by both approaches and , for @xmath156 , additional features on a microscopic length scale that are only resolved in the dft analysis .
the dft pressure profiles are also compared with profiles of average microscopic pressure inferred from pair distribution functions in the context of one application .
finally , we have established contact between our results for the lattice system and prior results for corresponding continuum systems , demonstrating full consistency    the statistical mechanical analysis of hard rods of mixed sizes presents itself as a natural and promising extension of this work .
significant ground has already been broken via both calculational tools used in this work .
the mathematical structure of exact density functionals for hard - rod mixtures has recently been established @xcite and is awaiting analysis in specific applications .
hard rod ensembles of mixed sizes on a lattice are mathematically equivalent to magnetic domains in ising chains .
the combinatorics and statistical mechanics of such domains analyzed via generalized exclusion statistics have been in place for some time @xcite and is awaiting extensions to heterogeneous environments and new applications of current interest .
the completion of the work reported here has paved the way for projects along these lines @xcite .
in terms of the particle ( hard rod ) momenta @xmath354 and positions @xmath355 , the microscopic momentum density in eq .
( [ eq : momentum - flow ] ) is given by @xmath356 .
the time derivative of its fourier transform @xmath357 reads ( with @xmath138 the mass of the rods , and assuming only pair interaction forces to be present ) @xmath358 here @xmath359 is the force of the @xmath90th on the @xmath360th particle ( @xmath361 ) , @xmath362 the external force on the @xmath360th particle , and we have used @xmath363 and newton s equations @xmath364 . for interaction forces obeying the principle of action and reaction , @xmath365 , the second term on the right hand side of eq .
( [ eq : dpidt ] ) can be written in the form @xmath366 $ ] , where @xmath367 and @xmath368 .
comparing eq .
( [ eq : dpidt ] ) with the fourier - transformed right hand side of eq .
( [ eq : momentum - flow ] ) , the microscopic pressure in fourier space becomes @xmath369 to obtain the corresponding expression in real space , we calculate @xmath370 where @xmath371\,,\\[1ex ] 0\ , , & \textrm{else}\,.\end{array}\right.\end{aligned}\ ] ] accordingly , @xmath372 using @xmath373 and eq .
( [ eq : g - function ] ) , the double sum can be written as @xmath374 , and the equilibrium average of eq .
( [ eq : pmic ] ) then yields eq .
( [ eq : p - rho2 ] ) .
consider a system of rods of size @xmath8 confined to a finite array of cells numbered @xmath375 .
the hardcore repulsion is the only interaction between rods .
the external potential @xmath20 is arbitrary .
the free energy functional ( [ eq : freeenergy - dft ] ) simplifies into @xmath376 where @xmath377 are the ( yet undetermined ) probabilities of rods at the allowed positions .
the minimization ( [ eq : structure - equations ] ) then leads to the following relations that determine the exact density profile of rods , @xmath220 , for an any given external potential @xmath20 at given temperature @xmath32 and chemical potential @xmath30 : @xmath378}{\prod\limits_{k = i}^{i+\sigma-1}\left[1-\sum\limits_{j = k-\sigma+1}^{k}\bar{n}_{j}\right]},\ ] ] for @xmath379 with @xmath310 for @xmath16 and @xmath380 implied . in some applications we use a semi - infinite array @xmath381 with the second boundary condition replaced by a prescribed ( zero or nonzero ) limit @xmath382 . in the following we use the control variables , @xmath383 with the implication that @xmath384 for @xmath16 and @xmath380 .    for rods of size
@xmath152 the hardcore repulsion does not produce any interference between the @xmath58 at different positions .
equations ( [ eq : b2 ] ) remain uncoupled .
the density profile @xmath58 of rods , which , in this case , coincides with the mass density profile @xmath59 , reads @xmath385 its only structure is that imposed by the potential @xmath20 .    in the case
@xmath168 a rod at position @xmath60 obstructs the placement of a rod positions @xmath386 and @xmath179 .
this interference is reflected in eqs .
( [ eq : b2 ] ) , which now read @xmath387 with @xmath388 implied .
we solve the coupled eqs .
( [ eq : b5 ] ) by a strategy that also works for @xmath190 as we shall see .
we reduce the set of nonlinear equations into two sets of recursion relations to be solved in sequence .
this method has the benefit of isolating the physical solution .
we begin by introducing the auxiliary quantities , @xmath389 we thus convert ( [ eq : b5 ] ) into @xmath390 from which we determine the @xmath173 recursively : @xmath391 the @xmath58 are then , in turn , determined recursively via ( [ eq : b6 ] ) : @xmath392 producing the explicit form @xmath393    a different rendition of that solution is derived from ( [ eq : b9 ] ) with use of ( [ eq : b8 ] ) : @xmath394 where the @xmath395 are generated recursively : @xmath396    if the external potential is symmetric under under reflection , as in power - law traps or boxes with rigid walls , we have @xmath397 , @xmath379
. the density profile of rods must then also exhibit that symmetry . to make this symmetry transparent we recognize that we have @xmath398 , @xmath379 , under these circumstances .
we can then transform @xmath399 into @xmath58 as follows :    @xmath400    now we generalize this method to rods of unrestricted size on the lattice : @xmath2 .
a rod of size @xmath8 at position @xmath60 obstructs the placement of rods at positions @xmath401 .
the right - hand side of ( [ eq : b2 ] ) contains @xmath58 at @xmath402 consecutive positions .
the coupled equations now involve polynomials of order @xmath8 .
the boundary conditions require that we set @xmath310 for @xmath403 and @xmath404 in these @xmath405 coupled equations .
the auxiliary quantities @xmath406^{-1},\quad i=1,\ldots , m \ ] ] then convert ( [ eq : b2 ] ) into the set of recursion relations @xmath407 for given @xmath173 the @xmath58 then follow recursively from ( [ eq : b14 ] ) : @xmath408
consider a system of @xmath76 hard rods of size @xmath8 at positions @xmath409 , @xmath410 on a 1d lattice of @xmath411 sites .
the system is confined by hard walls at positions @xmath412 and @xmath413 .
the lattice partition function @xmath414 with variable change @xmath415 and excess volume defined as @xmath416 becomes @xmath417 and , after summation over @xmath418 , @xmath419 the density and pair distribution functions are then expressible as follows in terms of partial partition functions @xmath420 representing systems of @xmath421 rods confined by hard walls at positions @xmath422 and @xmath90 @xcite : @xmath423 @xmath424 a lattice version of expression ( [ eq : p - rho2-non - interacting ] ) for the average microscopic pressure to be used in sec .
[ sec : grav - micro ] for comparison with the dft pressure profiles thus reads @xmath425