[Pw_forum] Error during examples run.
Dear QE users! I've just compiled QE-4.2.1 with ACML and gfortran on 2*AMD Xenon Dual Core server. Test's were passed with small discrepancy, but running all the examples i've got this error: root at thunder ~/Install/QE/espresso-4.2.1/examples # time ./run_all_examples >> 4_cores At line 98 of file lambda.f90 (unit = 4, file = 'elph. 0.00. 0.00. 0.00') Fortran runtime error: Constant string in input format (5x,'Gaussian Broadening: ',f7.3,' Ry, ngauss=',i4) ^ Here is the make.sys file (ranamed to txt because of google mail). What can I do to avoid this error in future? With best regards, Koroteev Victor Junior researcher NIIC SB RAS -- next part -- # make.sys. Generated from make.sys.in by configure. # compilation rules .SUFFIXES : .SUFFIXES : .o .c .f .f90 # most fortran compilers can directly preprocess c-like directives: use # $(MPIF90) $(F90FLAGS) -c $< # if explicit preprocessing by the C preprocessor is needed, use: # $(CPP) $(CPPFLAGS) $< -o $*.F90 # $(MPIF90) $(F90FLAGS) -c $*.F90 -o $*.o # remember the tabulator in the first column !!! .f90.o: $(MPIF90) $(F90FLAGS) -c $< # .f.o and .c.o: do not modify .f.o: $(F77) $(FFLAGS) -c $< .c.o: $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -c $< # DFLAGS = precompilation options (possible arguments to -D and -U) # used by the C compiler and preprocessor # FDFLAGS = as DFLAGS, for the f90 compiler # See include/defs.h.README for a list of options and their meaning # With the exception of IBM xlf, FDFLAGS = $(DFLAGS) # For IBM xlf, FDFLAGS is the same as DFLAGS with separating commas DFLAGS = -D__GFORTRAN -D__STD_F95 -D__FFTW -D__MPI -D__PARA -D__ACML FDFLAGS= $(DFLAGS) # IFLAGS = how to locate directories where files to be included are # In most cases, IFLAGS = -I../include IFLAGS = -I../include # MOD_FLAGS = flag used by f90 compiler to locate modules # Each Makefile defines the list of needed modules in MODFLAGS MOD_FLAG = -I # Compilers: fortran-90, fortran-77, C # If a parallel compilation is desired, MPIF90 should be a fortran-90 # compiler that produces executables for parallel execution using MPI # (such as for instance mpif90, mpf90, mpxlf90,...); # otherwise, an ordinary fortran-90 compiler (f90, g95, xlf90, ifort,...) # If you have a parallel machine but no suitable candidate for MPIF90, # try to specify the directory containing "mpif.h" in IFLAGS # and to specify the location of MPI libraries in MPI_LIBS MPIF90 = mpif90 #F90 = gfortran CC = cc F77= gfortran # C preprocessor and preprocessing flags - for explicit preprocessing, # if needed (see the compilation rules above) # preprocessing flags must include DFLAGS and IFLAGS CPP= cpp CPPFLAGS = -P -traditional $(DFLAGS) $(IFLAGS) # compiler flags: C, F90, F77 # C flags must include DFLAGS and IFLAGS # F90 flags must include MODFLAGS, IFLAGS, and FDFLAGS with appropriate syntax CFLAGS = -O3 $(DFLAGS) $(IFLAGS) F90FLAGS = $(FFLAGS) -x f95-cpp-input $(FDFLAGS) $(IFLAGS) $(MODFLAGS) FFLAGS = -O3 -g # compiler flags without optimization for fortran-77 # the latter is NEEDED to properly compile dlamch.f, used by lapack FFLAGS_NOOPT = -O0 -g # Linker, linker-specific flags (if any) # Typically LD coincides with F90 or MPIF90, LD_LIBS is empty LD = mpif90 LDFLAGS= -g LD_LIBS= # External Libraries (if any) : blas, lapack, fft, MPI # If you have nothing better, use the local copy : # BLAS_LIBS = /your/path/to/espresso/BLAS/blas.a # BLAS_LIBS_SWITCH = internal BLAS_LIBS = -L/opt/acml4.4.0/gfortran64/lib -lacml BLAS_LIBS_SWITCH = external # If you have nothing better, use the local copy : # LAPACK_LIBS = /your/path/to/espresso/lapack-3.2/lapack.a # LAPACK_LIBS_SWITCH = internal # For IBM machines with essl (-D__ESSL): load essl BEFORE lapack ! # remember that LAPACK_LIBS precedes BLAS_LIBS in loading order LAPACK_LIBS= -L/opt/acml4.4.0/gfortran64/lib -lacml LAPACK_LIBS_SWITCH = external SCALAPACK_LIBS = # nothing needed here if the the internal copy of FFTW is compiled # (needs -D__FFTW in DFLAGS) FFT_LIBS = # For parallel execution, the correct path to MPI libraries must # be specified in MPI_LIBS (except for IBM if you use mpxlf) MPI_LIBS = # IBM-specific: MASS libraries, if available and if -D__MASS is defined in FDFLAGS MASS_LIBS = # pgplot libraries (used by some post-processing tools) PGPLOT_LIBS= # ar command and flags - for most architectures: AR = ar, ARFLAGS = ruv AR = ar ARFLAGS= ruv # ranlib command. If ranlib is not needed (it isn't in most cases) use # RANLIB = echo RANLIB = ranlib # all internal and external libraries - do not modify FLIB_TARGETS = all LIBOBJS= ../flib/ptools.a ../flib/flib.a
[Pw_forum] Intel MPI
On Aug 18, 2010, at 19:03 , joaquin peralta wrote: > We use a surface of Al with 81 atoms in 128 cpus using intelMPI and > openMPI 1.4 but not in the same way! the first job uses 8 pools of 16 processors, the second 1 pool of 128 processors. The first choice seems to be reasonable, the second isn't, since an enormous amount of time is spent in communications (look at the time spent in fft_scatter). P. --- Paolo Giannozzi, Dept of Physics, University of Udine via delle Scienze 208, 33100 Udine, Italy Phone +39-0432-558216, fax +39-0432-558222
[Pw_forum] Intel MPI
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Paolo Giannozzi wrote: Can anybody report any experience linking with Intel version of MPI? --- Intel MPI is installed on the cluster I am using. Several recent versions of QE (including 4.2.1) are compiling and running without any problems. However, I do have problems in running SaX jobs on the same cluster. The problems with running SaX jobs started last year when this cluster was changed and several new libraries and compilers were installed at the same time. Together with the system manager I was trying to detect the problem with SaX. The frst idea was that this is because of (then new for us) the Lustre file system, the second was mvapich. A new version of mvapich was installed, but it did not help. There is a possibility that SaX jobs do not run on this cluster (they stayed in the queue forever) because of the problems with Intel MPI. Best regards, -- Goranka Bilalbegovic, Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, University of Zagreb, Croatia -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.democritos.it/pipermail/pw_forum/attachments/20100818/be7bd64e/attachment.htm
[Pw_forum] Graphene Structural Relaxation
Dear M. Pazoki: Your results were so strange to me, who have done some calculation on graphene with the PBE-rrkjus PP. I guess there should be something wrong in your input file. In addition to Xirainbow's comments, I want to say that Ecut=(30,300) Ry is good enough for the optimization of graphitic lattices, (35,350) may be better for some other purposes and (40,400) is great! You'd better supply your input file, then people can tell why your results were strange. Best Wishes! Yours Sincerely L. F. Huang -- == L.F.Huang(???) DFT and phonon physics == Add: Research Laboratory for Computational Materials Sciences, Instutue of Solid State Physics,the Chinese Academy of Sciences, P.O.Box 1129, Hefei 230031, P.R.China Tel: 86-551-5591464-326(office) Fax: 86-551-5591434 Our group: http://theory.issp.ac.cn == -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.democritos.it/pipermail/pw_forum/attachments/20100818/288bed78/attachment-0001.htm
[Pw_forum] the best choice for k-point
I think (1 1 8) converged very well. On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 10:41 PM, Farzad Molani wrote: > hello QE users, > I'm going to achieve the best kpoint and cut-off for my system. I got > results but I do'nt know, What is the best choice for K-point? > please help me, > thanks in advance.? > energy(Ry)k-point > -270.57530321 1 1 3 > -270.58540932 1 1 4 > -270.58749209 1 1 5 > -270.58517276 1 1 6 > -270.58547581 1 1 7 > -270.58556388 1 1 8 > -270.58553867 1 1 9 > -270.58554333 1 1 10 > > Farzad Molani, > Ph.D Student, > Department of Theoretical Physical Chemistry, > K. N. Toosi University of Technology, > Tehran, Iran. > Tel.: 009891 4442 3308 > Tel.: 009821 2306 4280 > Fax: 009821 2285 3650 > Web: > http://www.chem.kntu.ac.ir/~sjalili:/<http://www.chem.kntu.ac.ir/%7Esjalili:/> > > > ___ > Pw_forum mailing list > Pw_forum at pwscf.org > http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum > > -- -=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=**=-=**=-=**=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=- Hanyu Liu(???), State key Laboratory of Superhard Materials, Jilin University, China Email: liuhanyu08 at mails.jlu.edu.cn or ouuing at gmail.com skype: ouuing -- next part ------ An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.democritos.it/pipermail/pw_forum/attachments/20100818/fe3ec9c4/attachment.htm
[Pw_forum] Error during examples run.
On Aug 18, 2010, at 15:33 , Vit wrote: > Fortran runtime error: Constant > string in input format > (5x,'Gaussian Broadening: ',f7.3,' Ry, ngauss=',i4) it looks like your compiler doesn't like the format in read (iuelph,9000) degauss1, ngauss1 9000 format(5x,'Gaussian Broadening: ',f7.3,' Ry, ngauss=',i4) Not sure what the standard says. Ignore it if you do not need to calculate electron-phonon coefficients. Otherwise, replace with: 9000 format(26x,f7.3,12x,i4) and the like for all other formats. P. --- Paolo Giannozzi, Dept of Physics, University of Udine via delle Scienze 208, 33100 Udine, Italy Phone +39-0432-558216, fax +39-0432-558222
[Pw_forum] Super Cell
Sure you can! Who else should determine the atomic positions? Can you explain a little better what the problem is? SB On Aug 17, 2010, at 8:03 PM, Vin?cius Bertuzzo Lima wrote: > Please, it is possible to do this: > > I was wondering how to proceed the calculus by considering a cell where I > determine the exact place where the atoms are located. > I want to determine by myself the coordinates for each atom in the lattice. > > Vin?cius Bertuzzo Lima > Student of chemical in "Universidade Estadual Paulista - Unesp - FC" Brazil-SP > ___ > Pw_forum mailing list > Pw_forum at pwscf.org > http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum --- Stefano Baroni - SISSA & DEMOCRITOS National Simulation Center - Trieste http://stefano.baroni.me [+39] 040 3787 406 (tel) -528 (fax) / stefanobaroni (skype) La morale est une logique de l'action comme la logique est une morale de la pens?e - Jean Piaget Please, if possible, don't send me MS Word or PowerPoint attachments Why? See: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.democritos.it/pipermail/pw_forum/attachments/20100818/8a799496/attachment.htm
[Pw_forum] Intel MPI
Can anybody report any experience linking with Intel version of MPI? P. --- Paolo Giannozzi, Dept of Physics, University of Udine via delle Scienze 208, 33100 Udine, Italy Phone +39-0432-558216, fax +39-0432-558222
[Pw_forum] Speeding up the calculations
On Aug 16, 2010, at 12:12 , Bipul Rakshit wrote: > 1. in GRID_examples, its in 4.2 version examples only. > But I think its just a script, and it will work with older > versions of espresso's also. I don't think so: some minor changes were made to the input and the logic of the phonon code > 2. With your personal experience, is libraries like scalapack, FFTW > increase > the calculation speed (the phonon calculation especially) my personal experience is a) reported in the user guide, b) of little importance anyway, since the actual performances of a code depend upon a large number of factors P. --- Paolo Giannozzi, Dept of Physics, University of Udine via delle Scienze 208, 33100 Udine, Italy Phone +39-0432-558216, fax +39-0432-558222
[Pw_forum] Intel MPI
Me and Claudia are using intelmpi 4.0 in http://cystorm.ece.iastate.edu with a very good performance .. but we are not sure now ... let me explain : We use a surface of Al with 81 in 128 cpus using intelMPI and openMPI 1.4 The compilations options (make.sys), input file and output files are in this page (sorry for use my page but was the more fast) : http://www.lpmd.cl/jperalta/index.php?n=Site.QE-Cystorm Probably is not a good test, because we detect after that the cluster schedule manager (torque) was not work properly with intelMPI and was very probably that some external works are using process in the open-mpi running. Look this thread about schedule-manager and intelMPI http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/showthread.php?t=76537 Right now the cluster is under a upgrade, sure when we can do more test we shared that. Best Regards Joaquin and Claudia. On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 8:16 AM, Paolo Giannozzi wrote: > Can anybody report any experience linking with Intel > version of MPI? > > P. > --- > Paolo Giannozzi, Dept of Physics, University of Udine > via delle Scienze 208, 33100 Udine, Italy > Phone +39-0432-558216, fax +39-0432-558222 > > > > ___ > Pw_forum mailing list > Pw_forum at pwscf.org > http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum > -- Group of NanoMaterials http://www.gnm.cl Joaqu?n Andr?s Peralta Camposano http://zeth.ciencias.uchile.cl/~jperalta<http://zeth.ciencias.uchile.cl/%7Ejperalta> In a world without frontiers, who needs Gates and Win. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.democritos.it/pipermail/pw_forum/attachments/20100818/4637f898/attachment.htm
[Pw_forum] Additional informations about XSpectra
Dear Christian, here the answers to your questions: > (1) is the energy range (xemin,xemax) referred to the Fermi energy > of the preliminar scf calculation? No, it is referred to the Fermi level given in input in the xspectra file (input variable ef_r in the input_xspectra namelist. This means that if you do not specify the Fermi level then ef_r=0.0 and they are referred to the energy zero of the preliminary scf run. > (1) is there a special convention for the components of the wavevector > and of the polarization vector? The defaults are (1,0,0) and (0,1,0); > shouldn't they be orthogonal? This depends on the variable xcoordcrys. If the variable xcoordcrys=.true. then xkvec and xepsilon are the crystalline components of the wavevector and the polarization vector with respect to the direct lattice vectors as chosen by QE. On the contrary, if xcoordcrys=.false. then they are the components with respect to the cartesian axes (in direct space). Note that also the xkvec components are in direct space as this is customary in the XAS community. xkvec and xepsilon should of course be orthogonal. If they are not, then the code gives you a warning in output but it does not stop. The reason is that if you do a dipolar calculation only, then xkvec is irrelevant. > (3) last line of input, after the $cut_occ section > (question already posted on past 2/7 in this forum) it is the number of k-point necessary to calculate the XANES cross section. In practice you can chose to calculate the charge density with a given number of k-points and then the XANES with a larger one. Generally the convergence of the xanes cross section with respect to k-points is slower thant that of the charge density. This is similar to what you do with a density of states calculation, namely you first calculate the charge density with Nk k points and then the dos with a much larger Nk' grid. All the best, M. M. -- * * * * Matteo Calandra, Charge de Recherche (CR1) Institut de Min?ralogie et de Physique des Milieux Condens?s de Paris Universit? Pierre et Marie Curie, tour 16, case 115 4 Place Jussieu, 75252 Paris Cedex 05 France Tel: +33-1-44 27 52 16 Fax: +33-1-44 27 37 85 http://www.impmc.jussieu.fr/~calandra
[Pw_forum] Ni.pbe-sp-mt_gipaw.UPF: one pseudopotential for two, oxidation states? (Merlin Meheut)
Dear Merlin, the pseudopotential Ni.pbe-sp-mt_gipaw.UPF includes 3s and 3p semicore states as Paolo giannozzi suggested and it is a norm conseving pseudopotential. As far as I remember it was also tested on bulk Ni and the agreement with the experimental pressure was fine. Of course, being a Norm conseving with semicore states, it will require a cutoff of at least of 150 Ryd and not of 27.0 Ryd as your input file seems to suggest. M. >> ibrav=2, celldm(1) =6.65, nat= 1, ntyp= 1, >> nspin=2, >> starting_magnetization(1)=0.5, >> degauss=0.02, >> smearing='mp', >> occupations='smearing', >> ecutwfc =27.0 >> ecutrho =300.0 >> / -- * * * * Matteo Calandra, Charge de Recherche (CR1) Institut de Min?ralogie et de Physique des Milieux Condens?s de Paris Universit? Pierre et Marie Curie, tour 16, case 115 4 Place Jussieu, 75252 Paris Cedex 05 France Tel: +33-1-44 27 52 16 Fax: +33-1-44 27 37 85 http://www.impmc.jussieu.fr/~calandra
[Pw_forum] Intel MPI
We have been using mpiifort and mpiicc without major issues. If my memory serves me well they use the intel mpi libs while mpif90 and the rest of the gnu compilers provided by intel use mpich. Regards, L. On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 15:16 +0200, Paolo Giannozzi wrote: > Can anybody report any experience linking with Intel > version of MPI? > > P. > --- > Paolo Giannozzi, Dept of Physics, University of Udine > via delle Scienze 208, 33100 Udine, Italy > Phone +39-0432-558216, fax +39-0432-558222 > > > > ___ > Pw_forum mailing list > Pw_forum at pwscf.org > http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum > -- Lazaro Calderin Department of Physics Queen's University Kingston, Ontario Canada
[Pw_forum] (no subject)
Just an additional remark: please specify a meaningful subject in your next posts. Thanks, GS On 08/18/2010 12:06 AM, ?lvaro Alves wrote: > > Dear all, how do I get the SOMO (Singly Occupied Molecular Orbital) in > PWscf? > > Regards, > > A. S. Santos > > Universidade Federal Fluminense > Niter?i - Rio de Janeiro - Brasil > > > > ___ > Pw_forum mailing list > Pw_forum at pwscf.org > http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum > -- Gabriele Sclauzero, EPFL SB ITP CSEA PH H2 462, Station 3, CH-1015 Lausanne -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.democritos.it/pipermail/pw_forum/attachments/20100818/930eef0e/attachment.htm
[Pw_forum] (no subject)
Dear Alvaro, if you are doing a calculation for an isolated molecule (with a single k-point), then the code should print the HOMO and the LUMO levels at the end of the SCF loop. If I understand well, the SOMO is a singly occupied HOMO, hence your molecule is magnetic. If you fix the total magnetization then your calculation should converge without using the broadening of occupations and the code will still print HOMO and LUMO levels. Once you have identified the band index corresponding to your SOMO you can plot the KS eigenstate through the pp.x utility (please see related documentation and examples). HTH GS On 08/18/2010 12:06 AM, ?lvaro Alves wrote: > > Dear all, how do I get the SOMO (Singly Occupied Molecular Orbital) in > PWscf? > > Regards, > > A. S. Santos > > Universidade Federal Fluminense > Niter?i - Rio de Janeiro - Brasil > > > > ___ > Pw_forum mailing list > Pw_forum at pwscf.org > http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum > -- Gabriele Sclauzero, EPFL SB ITP CSEA PH H2 462, Station 3, CH-1015 Lausanne -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.democritos.it/pipermail/pw_forum/attachments/20100818/b903c324/attachment.htm
[Pw_forum] Graphene Structural Relaxation
On 08/18/2010 12:54 AM, meysam pazoki wrote: > > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: *meysam pazoki* <mailto:meysam.pazoki at gmail.com>> > Date: Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 11:46 PM > Subject: Graphene Structural Relaxation > To: pw_forum-request at pwscf.org <mailto:pw_forum-request at pwscf.org> > > > Dear PWSCF users > I have a problem in relaxation of grahene super cell with 24 atoms. In > relaxation procedure ,graphene hooney-comb structure completely > destroys and atoms have no regular ordering after relaxation > procedure.I use pbe-rrkjus psudopotential,4 3 3 kpoint grid,30 rydberg > cutff energy,300 rydberg ecutrho. > I use both ion_damps & bfgs algorithms and get similar results. > If i change the ecutrho to 100, atoms have an irregular positions in 3 > dimension,but when ecut rho set to 300 atoms have irregular position > in-plane. > furthermore if i set > :trust_radius_ini=.1D0,trust_radius_max=.3D0,bfgs_ndim = 3, > I have the honeycomb structure but some of c atoms exprience great > forces like: > > atom 19 type 1 force = 11948.08469282 -219.69802882 0. > > atom 20 type 1 force = 11782.00343549 12.01959200 0. > > atom 21 type 1 force = 11748.09287051 115.25218004 0. > > atom 22 type 1 force = 11241.09464255 -222.56999757 0. > > atom 23 type 1 force = -0.50941109 0.26861287 0. > > atom 24 type 1 force = 11905.77649683 -91.34763119 0. > These forces are simply crazy... I mean, if the units are those used by PWscf (Ry/Bohr) the forces that you are reporting are huge! If you have used the PP on the QE website, then the atomic positions and/or the cell dimensions that you have supplied to PWscf must be far off the equilibrium ones. Please provide an input file. GS > My question is what is wrong in my structure relaxation procedure that > result in such non-physical data. > > It would appreciated if anyone can help me in this problem > Thanks in advance > meysam pazoki > Ph.D student of physics > Sharif university of technology > > > ___ > Pw_forum mailing list > Pw_forum at pwscf.org > http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum > -- Gabriele Sclauzero, EPFL SB ITP CSEA PH H2 462, Station 3, CH-1015 Lausanne -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.democritos.it/pipermail/pw_forum/attachments/20100818/ac7e79d7/attachment.htm
[Pw_forum] Graphene Structural Relaxation
Dear meysam pazoki: Why you choose (4 3 3) kpoint grid. If you are dealing with monolayer graphene, I think you should change it to (1 x x). Furthermore, I do not think (x=3) is enough for graphene. Maybe you can increase (x) and have a try:) On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 6:54 AM, meysam pazoki wrote: > > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: meysam pazoki > Date: Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 11:46 PM > Subject: Graphene Structural Relaxation > To: pw_forum-request at pwscf.org > > > Dear PWSCF users > > I have a problem in relaxation of grahene super cell with 24 atoms. In > relaxation procedure ,graphene hooney-comb structure completely destroys and > atoms have no regular ordering after relaxation procedure.I use pbe-rrkjus > psudopotential,4 3 3 kpoint grid,30 rydberg cutff energy,300 rydberg > ecutrho. > I use both ion_damps & bfgs algorithms and get similar results. > If i change the ecutrho to 100, atoms have an irregular positions in 3 > dimension,but when ecut rho set to 300 atoms have irregular position > in-plane. > furthermore if i set :trust_radius_ini=.1D0,trust_radius_max=.3D0,bfgs_ndim > = 3, > I have the honeycomb structure but some of c atoms exprience great forces > like: > > atom 19 type 1 force = 11948.08469282 -219.69802882 0. > > atom 20 type 1 force = 11782.00343549 12.01959200 0. > > atom 21 type 1 force = 11748.09287051 115.25218004 0. > > atom 22 type 1 force = 11241.09464255 -222.56999757 0. > > atom 23 type 1 force = -0.50941109 0.26861287 0. > > atom 24 type 1 force = 11905.77649683 -91.34763119 0. > > My question is what is wrong in my structure relaxation procedure that > result in such non-physical data. > > It would appreciated if anyone can help me in this problem > > Thanks in advance > > meysam pazoki > Ph.D student of physics > Sharif university of technology > > > ___ > Pw_forum mailing list > Pw_forum at pwscf.org > http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum > > -- Hui Wang School of physics, Nankai University, Tianjin, China -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.democritos.it/pipermail/pw_forum/attachments/20100818/4ce38448/attachment.htm
