Paper detail

Jamming II: Edwards' statistical mechanics of random packings of hard spheres

The problem of finding the most efficient way to pack spheres has an illustrious history, dating back to the crystalline arrays conjectured by Kepler and the random geometries explored by Bernal in the 60's. This problem finds applications spanning from the mathematician's pencil, the processing of granular materials, the jamming and glass transitions, all the way to fruit packing in every grocery. There are presently numerous experiments showing that the loosest way to pack spheres gives a density of ~55% (RLP) while filling all the loose voids results in a maximum density of ~63-64% (RCP). While those values seem robustly true, to this date there is no physical explanation or theoretical prediction for them. Here we show that random packings of monodisperse hard spheres in 3d can pack between the densities 4/(4 + 2 \sqrt 3) or 53.6% and 6/(6 + 2 \sqrt 3) or 63.4%, defining RLP and RCP, respectively. The reason for these limits arises from a statistical picture of jammed states in which the RCP can be interpreted as the ground state of the ensemble of jammed matter with zero compactivity, while the RLP arises in the infinite compactivity limit. We combine an extended statistical mechanics approach 'a la Edwards' (where the role traditionally played by the energy and temperature in thermal systems is substituted by the volume and compactivity) with a constraint on mechanical stability imposed by the isostatic condition. Ultimately, our results lead to a phase diagram that provides a unifying view of the disordered hard sphere packing problem.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.