Sorry, better answer: You don't care about the radii for electrostatics, so you just ignore it when you pick your maximum search distance. The radius has nothing to do with energy evaluations, just with searches for nearby pairs.
On Mar 25, 2008, at 8:53 AM, Ben Webb wrote:
> Daniel Russel wrote: >> Does it makes sense to have sphere and non-sphere versions of >> nonbonded lists (ones with and without non-zero radii)? I know there >> are contexts where you can get away with the latter, but it seems >> like >> we mostly want spheres and the added confusion and maintenance burden >> might overwhelm the advantage. Thoughts? I don't see myself using the >> non-sphere version. > > How would you propose implementing electrostatics, implicit solvation, > statistical potentials, etc. with the sphere-based list? None of these > have particle radii. > > Ben > -- > ben@salilab.org http://salilab.org/~ben/ > "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data." > - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle > _______________________________________________ > IMP-dev mailing list > IMP-dev@salilab.org > https://salilab.org/mailman/listinfo/imp-dev