RE: AMBER: force field

From: Ross Walker <>
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 04:55:24 -0800

Dear Hungie

This is simply a matter of symantics - The force is the differential of the
potential energy and thus if the potential energy is defined as:

E = K(r-req)^2

Then the force is:

F = 2K(r-req)

Often people refer to K as being the force constant which in the above
example isn't strictly correct. The force constant is 2K. If however you
express the energy in terms of K/2 then the force is K(r-req) and so K in
this case is the force constant.

So really it is just how you choose to define the force constant. Since K is
a constant the only difference is in what you define it's value to be. I.e
in the first example the value of K would be half that of the second
example. As long as you are consistent in your definition and assignment of
the constants it doesn't strictly matter which form you use.

I hope this helps.
All the best

|\oss Walker

| Department of Molecular Biology TPC15 |
| The Scripps Research Institute |
| Tel:- +1 858 784 8889 | EMail:- |
| | PGP Key available on request |

-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of
A. Hungie
Sent: 02 January 2004 04:29
Subject: AMBER: force field

Dear All,

As I have seen in the literatures, the feature of force field of AMBER, for
example bond term is

summation { Kb(l-l0)^2}

whereas in some book it is

summation {Kb/2(l-l0)^2} , i.e. there is a term of 1/2

Could you please tell me why they are different?

Thank you very much in advance for your kindness.

Best Regards,

MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*

The AMBER Mail Reflector
To post, send mail to
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amber" to

The AMBER Mail Reflector
To post, send mail to
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amber" to
Received on Wed Jan 14 2004 - 15:53:13 PST
Custom Search