Jump to content

Dynamic scaling

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dynamic scaling(sometimes known asFamily–Vicsek scaling[1][2]) is a litmus test that shows whether an evolving system exhibitsself-similarity.In general a function is said to exhibit dynamic scaling if it satisfies:

Here the exponentis fixed by the dimensional requirement.The numerical value ofshould remain invariant despite the unit of measurement ofis changed by some factor sinceis a dimensionless quantity.

Many of these systems evolve in a self-similar fashion in the sense that data obtained from the snapshot at any fixed time is similar to the respective data taken from the snapshot of any earlier or later time. That is, the system is similar to itself at different times. The litmus test of such self-similarity is provided by the dynamic scaling.

History

[edit]

The term "dynamic scaling" as one of the essential concepts to describe the dynamics ofcritical phenomenaseems to originate in the seminal paper ofPierre HohenbergandBertrand Halperin(1977), namely they suggested "[...] that the wave vector- and frequency dependent susceptibility of a ferromagnet near its Curie point may be expressed as a function independent ofprovided that the length and frequency scales, as well as the magnetization and magnetic field, are rescaled by appropriate powers of.[3]

LaterTamás VicsekandFereydoon Familyproposed the idea of dynamic scaling in the context of diffusion-limited aggregation (DLA) of clusters in two dimensions.[2]The form of their proposal for dynamic scaling was:

where the exponents satisfy the following relation:

Test

[edit]

In such systems we can define a certain time-dependentstochastic variable.We are interested in computing the probability distribution ofat various instants of time i.e..The numerical value ofand the typical or mean value ofgenerally changes over time. The question is: what happens to the corresponding dimensionless variables? If the numerical values of the dimensional quantities change, but corresponding dimensionless quantities remain invariant then we can argue that snapshots of the system at different times are similar. When this happens we say that the system is self-similar.

One way of verifying dynamic scaling is to plot dimensionless variablesas a function ofof the data extracted at various different time. Then if all the plots ofvsobtained at different times collapse onto a single universal curve then it is said that the systems at different time are similar and it obeys dynamic scaling. The idea of data collapse is deeply rooted to theBuckingham Pi theorem.[4]Essentially such systems can be termed as temporal self-similarity since the same system is similar at different times.

Examples

[edit]

Many phenomena investigated by physicists are not static but evolve probabilistically with time (i.e.Stochastic process). The universe itself is perhaps one of the best examples. It has been expanding ever since theBig Bang.Similarly, growth ofnetworkslike theInternetare also ever growing systems. Another example ispolymer degradation[5]where degradation does not occur in a blink of an eye but rather over quite a long time. Spread of biological andcomputer virusestoo does not happen over night.

Many other seemingly disparate systems which are found to exhibit dynamic scaling. For example:

References

[edit]
  1. ^Family, F.;Vicsek, T.(1985). "Scaling of the active zone in the Eden process on percolation networks and the ballistic deposition model".Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General.18(2): L75–L81.Bibcode:1985JPhA...18L..75F.doi:10.1088/0305-4470/18/2/005.
  2. ^abVicsek, Tamás; Family, Fereydoon (1984-05-07). "Dynamic Scaling for Aggregation of Clusters".Physical Review Letters.52(19). American Physical Society (APS): 1669–1672.Bibcode:1984PhRvL..52.1669V.doi:10.1103/physrevlett.52.1669.ISSN0031-9007.
  3. ^Hohenberg, Pierre Claude; Halperin, Bertrand Israel (1 July 1977)."Theory of dynamic critical phenomena".Reviews of Modern Physics.49(3): 435–479.Bibcode:1977RvMP...49..435H.doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.49.435.S2CID122636335.."
  4. ^Barenblatt, G. I. (1996).Scaling, self-similarity, and intermediate asymptotics.Cambridge New York: Cambridge University Press.ISBN978-0-521-43522-2.OCLC33946899.
  5. ^Ziff, R M; McGrady, E D (1985-10-21). "The kinetics of cluster fragmentation and depolymerisation".Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General.18(15). IOP Publishing: 3027–3037.Bibcode:1985JPhA...18.3027Z.doi:10.1088/0305-4470/18/15/026.hdl:2027.42/48803.ISSN0305-4470.
  6. ^van Dongen, P. G. J.; Ernst, M. H. (1985-04-01). "Dynamic Scaling in the Kinetics of Clustering".Physical Review Letters.54(13). American Physical Society (APS): 1396–1399.Bibcode:1985PhRvL..54.1396V.doi:10.1103/physrevlett.54.1396.ISSN0031-9007.PMID10031021.
  7. ^Kreer, Markus; Penrose, Oliver (1994). "Proof of dynamical scaling in Smoluchowski's coagulation equation with constant kernel".Journal of Statistical Physics.75(3): 389–407.Bibcode:1994JSP....75..389K.doi:10.1007/BF02186868.S2CID17392921.
  8. ^Hassan, M. K.; Hassan, M. Z. (2009-02-19). "Emergence of fractal behavior in condensation-driven aggregation".Physical Review E.79(2): 021406.arXiv:0901.2761.Bibcode:2009PhRvE..79b1406H.doi:10.1103/physreve.79.021406.ISSN1539-3755.PMID19391746.S2CID26023004.
  9. ^Hassan, M. K.; Hassan, M. Z. (2008-06-13). "Condensation-driven aggregation in one dimension".Physical Review E.77(6). American Physical Society (APS): 061404.arXiv:0806.4872.Bibcode:2008PhRvE..77f1404H.doi:10.1103/physreve.77.061404.ISSN1539-3755.PMID18643263.S2CID32261771.
  10. ^Hassan, Md. Kamrul; Hassan, Md. Zahedul; Islam, Nabila (2013-10-24). "Emergence of fractals in aggregation with stochastic self-replication".Physical Review E.88(4): 042137.arXiv:1307.7804.Bibcode:2013PhRvE..88d2137H.doi:10.1103/physreve.88.042137.ISSN1539-3755.PMID24229145.S2CID30562144.
  11. ^Hassan, M Kamrul; Hassan, M Zahedul; Pavel, Neeaj I (2011-04-04). "Dynamic scaling, data-collapse and self-similarity in Barabási–Albert networks".Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical.44(17). IOP Publishing: 175101.arXiv:1101.4730.Bibcode:2011JPhA...44q5101K.doi:10.1088/1751-8113/44/17/175101.ISSN1751-8113.S2CID15700641.
  12. ^Hassan, M.K.; Pavel, N.I.; Pandit, R.K.; Kurths, J. (2014). "Dyadic Cantor set and its kinetic and stochastic counterpart".Chaos, Solitons & Fractals.60.Elsevier BV: 31–39.arXiv:1401.0249.Bibcode:2014CSF....60...31H.doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2013.12.010.ISSN0960-0779.S2CID14494072.
  13. ^Kardar, Mehran; Parisi, Giorgio; Zhang, Yi-Cheng (3 March 1986)."Dynamic Scaling of Growing Interfaces".Physical Review Letters.56(9): 889–892.Bibcode:1986PhRvL..56..889K.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.56.889.PMID10033312..
  14. ^D'souza, Raissa M. (1997). "Anomalies in Simulations of Nearest Neighbor Ballistic Deposition".International Journal of Modern Physics C.08(4). World Scientific Pub Co Pte Lt: 941–951.Bibcode:1997IJMPC...8..941D.doi:10.1142/s0129183197000813.ISSN0129-1831.
  15. ^Kreer, Markus (2022). "An elementary proof for dynamical scaling for certain fractional non-homogeneous Poisson processes".Statistics & Probability Letters.182(61). Elsevier B.V.: 109296.arXiv:2103.07381.doi:10.1016/j.spl.2021.109296.ISSN0167-7152.S2CID232222701.