Re: [gmx-users] Adding polarizability

David, > Interesting, does that include all the multipoles and buffered 7-14 > potentials etc? Yes. My understanding is that the implementation is somehow separate from the main AMBER implementation and actually requires a copy of Tinker to set up the input files, but this may have changed (I hav

Re: [gmx-users] Adding polarizability

David Mobley wrote: David, As Mark answered there is no out of thebox polarizability. AFAIK there is no complete force field like that in Amber either, only Tinker has one. Just to clarify here, AMBER has an implementation of AMOEBA, Jay Ponder's polarizable force field that is also implement

Re: [gmx-users] Adding polarizability

David, > As Mark answered there is no out of thebox polarizability. AFAIK there > is no complete force field like that in Amber either, only Tinker has one. Just to clarify here, AMBER has an implementation of AMOEBA, Jay Ponder's polarizable force field that is also implemented in Tinker. So yes

Re: [gmx-users] Adding polarizability

Eric Shamay wrote: Dear gromacs community, I've been trying to switch over from AMBER and I'm running into a few issues that the manual doesn't clarify well enough for me. Can anyone point me to information on adding in polarizability to atoms? In amber it was a simple matter of adjusting the

Re: [gmx-users] Adding polarizability

Eric Shamay wrote: Dear gromacs community, I've been trying to switch over from AMBER and I'm running into a few issues that the manual doesn't clarify well enough for me. Can anyone point me to information on adding in polarizability to atoms? In amber it was a simple matter of adjusting the

[gmx-users] Adding polarizability

Dear gromacs community, I've been trying to switch over from AMBER and I'm running into a few issues that the manual doesn't clarify well enough for me. Can anyone point me to information on adding in polarizability to atoms? In amber it was a simple matter of adjusting the frcmod file, but I can'