INTRODUCTION
The optical Solitons has undergone three decades of research, for it's promising application to the future of communication technology. Solitons arise from a balance between the inherent dispersion and nonlinear properties of optical fibers. In fact optical Solitons in fibers are found to be a balance between group velocity dispersion and Kerr nonlinearity. Numerical simulations and experiments have shown that Solitons can propagate an extended distance without distortion, so they may become an ideal massage carrier in long distance communication systems. The exact investigation of Solitons behavior demands for the solutions of the governing equation. Propagation of Solitons is described by nonlinear Schrödinger equation (NLSE) (Iizuka, 2002; Taha and Ablowitz, 1984). These Soliton waves have been investigated analytically and numerically by many researchers (Hasegawa and Kodama, 1995; Agrawal, 2001; Ablowitz and Clarkson, 1991). Soliton interaction is one of the most exciting areas of research in nonlinear dynamics. The unusual features of collisions in systems described by the Kortewegde vries (kdv) (Korteweg and de Vries, 1895) equation were the starting point of these intensive studies. An undesirable effect of nonlinearity is to cause mutual interaction (Chu and Desem, 1983) between pulses if they are launched close together. The interaction between two launched Solitons into a fiber is important not only from a practical point of view but also it illustrates the practicallike behavior of the Solitons. It is well known by now that such interaction can result in bandwidth reduction by a factor of 10 (Chu and Desem, 1985) Solitons travel down the fiber. The interaction distance is affected by some parameters. In this study, we investigate the effect of initial Solitons' separation and their widths on the interaction distance and interaction length with regards to minimizing such interaction using computer simulation.
NONLINEAR SCHRÖDINGER EQUATION
Several wave equations that exhibit Solitons are for instance Kortewegde vries (Kdv) and nonlinear Schrödinger equation (NLSE). To model Soliton pulse propagation in optical fibers, we have solved the dynamic equation known as nonlinear Schrödinger equation using basic numerical methods.
If U(z,t) denotes the complex amplitude of a pulse traveling along an optical
fiber, then its evolution is governed by the NLSE in the form of:
where, z is the distance along the direction of propagation, t is the time,
β and β_{1} are the second and third order group velocity
dispersion, γ is a constant that qualifies the nonlinear phenomena and
α is absorption coefficient. To solve Eq. 1, the third
order dispersion and the absorption coefficient are ignored for simplicity and
hence the NLS equation becomes:
Equation 2 allows an exact Norder temporal Soliton solution
for the special case when the initial condition U(t) is given by:
where, N is an integer, E_{0} is the pulse amplitude and t_{0}
is the pulse width. The relationship between the amplitude and the width of
a Soliton is given by:
and that the intensity U(z,t)^{2} in NSoliton is periodic in z direction
with the period of:
NUMERICAL SOLUTION OF NLSE
If the initial condition U(t) doesn't correspond to a NSoliton, then a numerical
approach is necessary for a full understanding of the propagation. We have chosen
the direct explicit finite difference method (Chang and Morris, 2005) to simulate
the propagation of Solitons. The explicit method is perhaps the simplest algorithm
based on finite difference to solve the NLSE. Assuming that the initial conditions
of the pulse launched is given by the temporal shape U(z = 0,t) = U(t) where
the time extends in the range t_{i}≤t≤t_{f}, then we aim
to determine the function U(z,t) which is the spatiotemporal evolution of the
pulse. At first, we discretize Eq. 2 via the introduction
of the shorthand notation:
where, z_{j} = jh and t_{k} = t_{i} + (k1)τ,
where j = 0, 1, 2, … and k = 1, 2, …, K denote the spatial and temporal
indices, respectively. The finite difference grid consists of perpendicular
lines that run parallel to z and t axes. This (z,t) spacetime plane is represented
by the grid matrix shown in Fig. 1. The space and time increments
are denoted by h and τ, respectively. The boundary conditions are and and
so the grid spacing is .

Fig. 1: 
Grid matrix showing the (z,t) placetime plane 
To discrete Eq. 2, we approximate the spatial derivative
by a first order twopoint difference and the time derivative by a second order
centered difference (Lopez et al., 2005). By doing so, we obtain Eq.
7
Rearranging for we
obtain:
where, α = iβh/2τ^{2} and c= iγh. In direct explicit
method we can compute U at level j+1 in terms of the values of U at level j.
Equation 8 can be applied to the internal grid points k =
2, …, K1. If we express the values of as
a column vector ,
we can rewrite Eq. 8 in a matrix form as:
where, A is a tridiagonal square matrix of size (K2)*(K2) given by:
Equation 9 is the basic propagating equation for solving
the NLSE numerically with the direct explicit method and then for simulating
temporal Solitons.
NUMERICAL CALCULATIONS
The evolution of the fundamental Soliton is given by

Fig. 2: 
Two Soliton pulses with initial separation 2q and pulse width
t_{0} 

Fig. 3: 
The time evolution of two interacting Solitons with t_{0}
= 2 ps over 75 periods 
To observe the Solitons interaction, we launch two fundamental Solitons initially
separated by a time 2q from each other in the form of:
where, Q is the relative amplitude and φ is the initial phase differences.
Figure 2 shows two Soliton pulses with initial separation
2q and pulse width t_{0}.
We take Q = 1 and φ = 0 to see the Solitons interaction since Solitons
of equal amplitude and phase can collide and attract each other (Haus Hermann,
1993). Figure 3 shows time evolution of two interacting
Solitons. In our calculations, the time interval is tε[5t_{0},5t_{0}]
and the pulses are let to propagate until at least 75 Soliton periods. The typical
physical constants are β = 1.5ps^{2 }km^{1} and γ
= 3W^{1 }km^{1}. The numerical parameters are K = 150, t_{0}
= 2ps and the propagation step size is h = L/400.

Fig. 4: 
The interaction distance v.s. pulse separation for two
s of constant width. The interaction distance gets its maximum value at
a initial Soliton separation equal to 10.6 times the pulse width 

Fig. 5: 
The interaction distance vs pulse width with q = 4t_{0}.
The interaction distance increases by increasing the pulse width 
According to the numerical results, keeping the pulse width constant, two Solitons
collide each other as a function of pulse separation. This behavior is shown
in Fig. 4. The interaction distance gets its maximum value
at a initial Soliton separation equal to 10.6 times the pulse width.
Another numerical result has been obtained by varying the pulse width t_{0}
while the pulse separation is kept (q = 4t_{0}). In this case the interaction
distance changes in a parabolic manner (Fig. 5).
Now we keep the pulse separation constant, say 2q = 16 ps and vary the pulse
width t_{0}. In this case, the interaction distance decreases. In another
words two s collide each other in a closer distances (Fig. 6).
Another interesting result is the interaction length with which we mean the
length that two Solitons interact with each other. Figure 7
shows that the interaction length increases as the pulse width increases.

Fig. 6: 
The interaction distance v.s. pulse width for Solitons with
constant pulse separation of 16 ps. The interaction distance decreases by
increasing the pulse width with q = 16 

Fig. 7: 
The interaction length v.s. pulse width for Solitons of
constant pulse separation 16 ps. The interaction length increases as the
pulse width is increasing 

Fig. 8: 
The time evolution of two interacting Solitons with t_{0}
= 8 ps over 75 periods 
Figure 8 shows the time evolution of two interacting Solitons
which has been shown in Fig. 3. In this case, the pulse width
is t_{0} = 8ps instead of t_{0} = 2ps. Comparing these two figures,
we see that the interaction distance decreases while the interaction length
increases by increasing the Soliton pulse width.
CONCLUSION
In this research, we studied Soliton interaction and its relation with Soliton separation, pulse width and also interaction length. According to numerical results, interaction distance increases by increasing Soliton separation and gets it’ maximum value at about Soliton separation 10.6 times the pulse width. Keeping the pulse separation constant, an increase in pulse width causes a decrease in interaction distance and an increase in interaction length. Since the pulse width is a measure of the quantity of data communication, therefore Solitons with large pulse width increases Solitons interaction which is not desirable. Thus in Soliton communication systems, the best value for pulse separation is 10.6 times the pulse width and the optimised Soliton pulse width is it’ minimum value.