Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: 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
Abstract:

Answer: we consider linear arrays of cells of volume @xmath0 populated by monodisperse rods of size @xmath1 , @xmath2 , subject to hardcore exclusion interaction . each rod experiences a position - dependent external potential . in one application we also examine effects of contact forces between rods . we employ two distinct methods of exact analysis with complementary strengths and different limits of spatial resolution to calculate profiles of pressure and density on mesoscopic and microscopic length scales at thermal equilibrium . one method uses density functionals and the other statistically interacting vacancy particles . the applications worked out include gravity , power - law traps , and hard walls . we identify oscillations in the profiles on a microscopic length scale and show how they are systematically averaged out on a well - defined mesoscopic length scale to establish full consistency between the two approaches . the continuum limit , realized as @xmath3 , @xmath4 at nonzero and finite @xmath1 , connects our highest - resolution results with known exact results for monodisperse rods in a continuum . we also compare the pressure profiles obtained from density functionals with the average microscopic pressure profiles derived from the pair distribution function .