image
Physics Forums Logo
image
image
* Register * Upgrade Blogs Library Staff Rules Mark Forums Read
image
image   image
image

Go Back   Physics Forums > Physics > Quantum Physics


Reply

image What is meant by "molecular temperature"? Share It Thread Tools Search this Thread image
Old Jun23-05, 08:31 PM                  #1
shrumeo

shrumeo is Offline:
Posts: 250
What is meant by "molecular temperature"?

Hello,

I got into a debate with someone about the term "molecular temperature."

I said "You can't define the temperature of a single molecule. It doesn't make sense."

And they said. "But look at all these papers where people use the term molecular temperature. They must mean the temperature of a single molecule."

I said "I don't know what they mean, but they can't mean that."

So can anyone out there answer this?

************************************************** ********

Here are some examples of its usage:

Coherent matter waves of fullerenes:
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0412003

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/0402/0402146.pdf

Femtosecond laser absorption studies:

http://www.chemie.hu-berlin.de/ernst...bstract27.html

Computational molecular dynamics:
http://www.nd.edu/~izaguirr/papers/SAC03_MaIz0x.pdf

http://cphys.s.kanazawa-u.ac.jp/icc...html/p2-49.html

Ultracold stuff:
http://newton.ex.ac.uk/aip/physnews.393.html

http://www.aip.org/enews/physnews/2002/split/615-2.html

Gas-phase electron diffraction:
http://www.genetical.com/dc/Scientif...PED/Usage.html

Atmosphere?:
http://www.sworld.com.au/steven/space/atmosphere/

************************************************** *******

So can someone please explain what any of these people mean when they invoke the phrase "molecular temperature"?

I seriously doubt that they mean the temperature of a single molecule.
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun23-05, 09:20 PM                  #2
Nicky

Nicky is Offline:
Posts: 54
In my opinion, the term "molecular temperature" does make intuitive sense. A single molecule can have excited electronic states, vibrational states and rotational states. The molecule may also lie in an external potential well, in which it is bouncing around. All of these excitations contribute to the molecule's "temperature".
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun24-05, 03:07 AM                  #3
Crosson

Crosson is Offline:
Posts: 1,298
Recognitions:
Science Advisor Science Advisor
It is possible to define temperature for any system that has multiple ways to store a given amount of energy. The key missing point in your understanding is that you don't know wat temperature is.

Is it some kind of measurement of the average energy? No, and this is a common mistake.

In order to understand what temperature is, you must understand what entropy is. Entropy is the number of ways a system can arrange a given amount of energy.

Think about a cold object. If I add to it some energy, then its entropy goes up significantly because so many particles share so little energy (lots of ways to arrange)/.

Think about a hot object. If I add to it some energy, its entropy hardly increases because the entropy is already so large.

Entropy is the key to understanding temperature. Once you see how we can define molecular entropy it is easy to define molecular temperature.
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun24-05, 06:34 AM       Last edited by Juan R.; Jun24-05 at 06:37 AM..            #4
Juan R.

Juan R. is Offline:
Posts: 433
Thermal and statistical

Originally Posted by shrumeo
Hello,

I got into a debate with someone about the term "molecular temperature."

I said "You can't define the temperature of a single molecule. It doesn't make sense."

And they said. "But look at all these papers where people use the term molecular temperature. They must mean the temperature of a single molecule."

I said "I don't know what they mean, but they can't mean that."

So can anyone out there answer this?

So can someone please explain what any of these people mean when they invoke the phrase "molecular temperature"?

I seriously doubt that they mean the temperature of a single molecule.
You are confusing thermal with statistical temperature.

Thermal temperature is a old concept, it is derived from thermal entropy and it applicable only to macroscopic bodies.

Statistical entropy is a modern quantum generalization like statistical temperature. It is applicable to single molecules, atoms, or even single atomic nucleus.

In fact, from quantum thermodynamics one can predict phase transitions on nucleus. For more information on molecular, atomic, and mesoscopic temperatures can see CPS: physchem/0309002 and references therein on nuclear studies (a copy will be available online in www.canonicalscience.com in brief).

Note: In the macroscopic limit both temperatures agree.
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun25-05, 01:30 AM                  #5
shrumeo

shrumeo is Offline:
Posts: 250
Originally Posted by Nicky
In my opinion, the term "molecular temperature" does make intuitive sense. A single molecule can have excited electronic states, vibrational states and rotational states. The molecule may also lie in an external potential well, in which it is bouncing around. All of these excitations contribute to the molecule's "temperature".
Ok, of course a single molecule can be in a particular vibrational, rotational, electronic, and rotational state. At any given instance it will be one energy state for each of these things. My understanding about temperature is that it represents an average of these things (including translational kinetic energy and such) of large numbers of bodies. I have always thought of it as requiring there to be at least some degree of a distribution of energy states before being able to average these up into an overall temerature.

I just don't see how you could measure the temperature of a single molecule in Kelvins or Celcius. You would have to talk about its energy in units of energy like joules or eV or something.
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun25-05, 01:42 AM                  #6
shrumeo

shrumeo is Offline:
Posts: 250
Originally Posted by Crosson
It is possible to define temperature for any system that has multiple ways to store a given amount of energy.
At any given instant.

Instantaneously.

A molecule will not be in multiple energy states at the same instant. Will it?

The key missing point in your understanding is that you don't know wat temperature is.
Could you then explain it to me?

Is it some kind of measurement of the average energy? No, and this is a common mistake.
Well, this must be the mistake I am encountering, please elaborate...

In order to understand what temperature is, you must understand what entropy is. Entropy is the number of ways a system can arrange a given amount of energy.

Think about a cold object. If I add to it some energy, then its entropy goes up significantly because so many particles share so little energy (lots of ways to arrange)/.

Think about a hot object. If I add to it some energy, its entropy hardly increases because the entropy is already so large.

Entropy is the key to understanding temperature. Once you see how we can define molecular entropy it is easy to define molecular temperature.
I understand how entropy works. I dig the 2nd law and stuff.
But please explain to me why if I can define molecular entropy then I can define molecular temperature.

I'm curious as to your explanation of both of these terms.
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun25-05, 01:44 AM                  #7
Muadib

Muadib is Offline:
Posts: 4
If absolute zero is when particles come to a complete hault, then would the hottest temperature be when those particles are zooming around at light speed? If so, what temperature is that?
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun25-05, 01:58 AM                  #8
shrumeo

shrumeo is Offline:
Posts: 250
Originally Posted by Juan R.
You are confusing thermal with statistical temperature.

Thermal temperature is a old concept, it is derived from thermal entropy and it applicable only to macroscopic bodies.

Statistical entropy is a modern quantum generalization like statistical temperature. It is applicable to single molecules, atoms, or even single atomic nucleus.

In fact, from quantum thermodynamics one can predict phase transitions on nucleus. For more information on molecular, atomic, and mesoscopic temperatures can see CPS: physchem/0309002 and references therein on nuclear studies (a copy will be available online in www.canonicalscience.com in brief).

Note: In the macroscopic limit both temperatures agree.
How can you have statistics on one molecule, atom, or nucleus?

What is temperature if not a thermal measurement?
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun25-05, 02:00 AM                  #9
shrumeo

shrumeo is Offline:
Posts: 250
And can anyone please explain at least what the folks who wrote the papers on the fullerene matter beams meant by the term "molecular temperature."
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun25-05, 02:04 AM                  #10
shrumeo

shrumeo is Offline:
Posts: 250
Originally Posted by Muadib
If absolute zero is when particles come to a complete hault, then would the hottest temperature be when those particles are zooming around at light speed? If so, what temperature is that?
I guess it would depend on how massive the particles were.
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun25-05, 04:35 AM                  #11
Nicky

Nicky is Offline:
Posts: 54
Originally Posted by shrumeo
Ok, of course a single molecule can be in a particular vibrational, rotational, electronic, and rotational state. At any given instance it will be one energy state for each of these things. My understanding about temperature is that it represents an average of these things (including translational kinetic energy and such) of large numbers of bodies. ...
But a molecule is itself an assembly of smaller bodies (nuclei and electrons). Consider that, for example, a large protein molecule may contain many thousands of constituent atoms.
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun25-05, 02:57 PM                  #12
shrumeo

shrumeo is Offline:
Posts: 250
Originally Posted by Nicky
But a molecule is itself an assembly of smaller bodies (nuclei and electrons). Consider that, for example, a large protein molecule may contain many thousands of constituent atoms.
So are you saying that a molecule can be large enough to contain so many different energy states that one could possibly measure a temperature somehow from this molecule?

As in a strand of DNA or cellulose or something. It could be so long and wrapped up in itself and be of such a size as to have a single temperature?

Apologies for the following stream:

I was thinking of this too as a possibility. I brought this up to someone else and we got into a discussion about what do we mean by a molecule? Is a big sheet of cross-linked polymer like latex one big (or a few big) molecule(s)? If so, then one could consider a plate of glass one molecule or crystal or a chunk of metal a large molecule? I mean, all the atoms are continuously bonded to another atom in the same structure. We don't usually think of these things a molecules and they really aren't, but for some reason we normally consider very large but still microscopic molecules, such as in biology, as molecules. It's as if we wouldn't have another name for it. Well, macromolecule is a typical term, and I do suppose it may have been introduced to possibly differentiate between small molecules that behave very discretely and a very large polymeric-type molecules.

So besides all that, it doesn't seem to me that the authors of the C70 matter beam paper(s) are using the term "molecular temperature" this way. Do you think they mean the temperature of single fullerene molecules in the sense that we have discussed above?
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun25-05, 10:25 PM                  #13
Nicky

Nicky is Offline:
Posts: 54
Originally Posted by shrumeo
So are you saying that a molecule can be large enough to contain so many different energy states that one could possibly measure a temperature somehow from this molecule?

As in a strand of DNA or cellulose or something. It could be so long and wrapped up in itself and be of such a size as to have a single temperature?
Yes, that is what I mean, except that the temperature concept is even applicable to molecules much smaller than DNA.

So besides all that, it doesn't seem to me that the authors of the C70 matter beam paper(s) are using the term "molecular temperature" this way. Do you think they mean the temperature of single fullerene molecules in the sense that we have discussed above?
Here is an except from one of the fullerene beam papers:

Originally Posted by arxiv.org/quant-ph/0412003
This interferometric setup is now complemented by a
heating stage about 1 m behind the oven and 7 cm in
front of the first grating. It serves to vary the internal
energy of the molecules by photon absorption
They appear to mean "temperature" as the excitation of individual molecules. This is C70 they are talking about, so each one is really a little sheet of graphite curled in on itself. It's practically a macroscopic object.
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun26-05, 05:34 AM       Last edited by Juan R.; Jun26-05 at 06:00 AM..            #14
Juan R.

Juan R. is Offline:
Posts: 433
Originally Posted by shrumeo
How can you have statistics on one molecule, atom, or nucleus?

What is temperature if not a thermal measurement?
It appears that you have read books in equilibrium statistical thermodynamics or kinetics and are misunderstanding statistical in a broad sense with statistics of a population of molecules or atoms. It also appears that you believe that thermal temperature and kinetic temperature are the same that statistical temperature.

One can perfectly do statistics of a single molecule, atom, or nucleus, taking the different quantum states of that system like a "population".

The general formula for the entropy of a system is

LaTeX Code: <BR>S = -k \\ Tr \\{ \\rho \\ ln \\rho \\}<BR>

where LaTeX Code:  \\rho is the density matrix of the single molecule, atom, or nucleus and LaTeX Code:  k is the Boltzman constant. One also know the energy LaTeX Code:  E of a single molecule, atom, or nucleus, therefore

LaTeX Code: <BR>\\frac{1}{T} \\equiv \\frac{\\partial S}{\\partial E}<BR>

I think that you error is in believing that entropy is a macroscopic quantity applicable only to a great number of molecules, what is not true.

From above definition of temperature one can obtain kinetic temperature (average of kinetic motion) and thermal temperature (internal energy LaTeX Code:  U by unit of entropy for an Avogadro number of molecules) like special cases.
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun27-05, 04:19 PM       Last edited by shrumeo; Jun27-05 at 06:22 PM..            #15
shrumeo

shrumeo is Offline:
Posts: 250
Originally Posted by Nicky
Yes, that is what I mean, except that the temperature concept is even applicable to molecules much smaller than DNA.
Well DNA can be all sizes.

So where do you draw the line?

At what point do decide that a molecule is large enough to have its own temperature? And at what size does a molecule stop being a molecule?



Here is an except from one of the fullerene beam papers:

Originally Posted by arxiv.org/quant-ph/0412003
This interferometric setup is now complemented by a
heating stage about 1 m behind the oven and 7 cm in
front of the first grating. It serves to [B
vary the internal
energy [/b]of the molecules by photon absorption

They appear to mean "temperature" as the excitation of individual molecules. This is C70 they are talking about, so each one is really a little sheet of graphite curled in on itself. It's practically a macroscopic object.
{I know what C70 is, thanks. And I wouldn't go around saying that it was practiaclly a macroscopic object since it's maybe 8 angstroms across.}
Are you so sure?
See, they used the term "internal energy" when speaking of the molecules.
Why would they use the term internal energy in the excerpt you chose?
They could definitely calculate the internal energy of one fullerene molecule.
Are you saying they can also calculate the temperature?
The way I read that excerpt is that they had a heating stage right near the grating to increase the temperature of the beam which is a result of varying or increasing the internal energy of the molecules.

Do you see why I'm having such a hard time of this?
The normal definition of temperature doesn't fit here.

I sincerely doubt they mean to express in their paper that a C70 molecule has enough variation in it's states of energy to be able to calculate (couldn't measure it) an instantaneous temperature in Kelvin.

I think they just threw the word molecular in before temperature to make it sound cool. I hink they just mean the temperature of the molecular beam.

{edit: Yes, I see now, by actually reading the paper instead of just skimming, that they intend to mean (or mean to intend?) that the term molecular temperature refers to the temperature of single molecules.}
  Reply With Quote
Old Jun27-05, 06:19 PM                  #16
shrumeo

shrumeo is Offline:
Posts: 250
Originally Posted by Juan R.
It appears that you have read books in equilibrium statistical thermodynamics or kinetics and are misunderstanding statistical in a broad sense with statistics of a population of molecules or atoms. It also appears that you believe that thermal temperature and kinetic temperature are the same that statistical temperature.

One can perfectly do statistics of a single molecule, atom, or nucleus, taking the different quantum states of that system like a "population".
Wouldn't this be a rather small population?

{No, I'm just a chemist who took the word of certain professors back in the day...}

The general formula for the entropy of a system is

LaTeX Code: <BR>S = -k \\ Tr \\{ \\rho \\ ln \\rho \\}<BR>

where LaTeX Code:  \\rho is the density matrix of the single molecule, atom, or nucleus and LaTeX Code:  k is the Boltzman constant.
What's LaTeX Code: r ?
This is the first time I've seen this equation.
Of course, since I am a simple chemist, I've only seen something like:

LaTeX Code:  S = k \\{ \\ln \\Omega \\} \\

It's this sort of understanding (or really this level of understanding) and this defintion of entropy that I am working with. Or really I am thinking along the lines of relating entropy and temperature via the heat capacity of a given substance. These are all "macroscopic" terms in this line of thinking, of course.

But anyway, are you saying that perhaps the equation you have above is a quantum modification or a generalization of the old-school Boltzmann Principle?
One also know the energy LaTeX Code:  E of a single molecule, atom, or nucleus, therefore

LaTeX Code: <BR>\\frac{1}{T} \\equiv \\frac{\\partial S}{\\partial E}<BR>
Yeah, see that's what my problem here is.
I always thought of the Bolzmann constant as was a way to relate energy to temperature, especially since it's expressed in terms of J/K.

I guess here you are defining temperature as a relation between entropy and total energy? In this case would the entropy be a component of this total energy? If that is indeed what you mean by LaTeX Code: E since it's vague to me what LaTeX Code: E you are talking about here.

Any time I see this sort of thing (where temperature is in an equation that can apply to a single particle) I assume that the temperature in the equation is the "ambient temperature" or the temperature of the surroundings. For example, when someone talks about the temerature dependence of some molecular or lattice vibration, they don't mean the temperature of the single vibration or the temperature of the single molecule, but the temperature of the surrounding medium. But, I'm probably wrong in this way of looking at things.

I think that you error is in believing that entropy is a macroscopic quantity applicable only to a great number of molecules, what is not true.
Well, I guess I wasn't thinking in terms of entropy so much.
I was really looking at a temperature as an average and nothing more.
I guess you are saying effectively the same thing as Nicky.
That since there is an ensemble of energy states within a single molecule at a given instant, whether they are different manifestations (ie, vibrations, rotations, electronic states, etc), that these energies can all be averaged into a temperature?

So, in the old-school Boltzmann principle, the value for LaTeX Code:  \\Omega  could be very small, but as long as it's more than 1, all is good?



From above definition of temperature one can obtain kinetic temperature (average of kinetic motion) and thermal temperature (internal energy LaTeX Code:  U by unit of entropy for an Avogadro number of molecules) like special cases.
So you are saying that in the fullerene beam paper, when they use the term "molecular temperature", the authors are perhaps referring to the kinetic temperature of single fullerene molecules?

For instance when they say:
Originally Posted by Arndt et al.
We change the internal temperature
of the molecules in a controlled way before they enter a
near-field interferometer, and observe the corresponding
reduction of the interference contrast.
that this is what they mean?

It's almost like they wanted to say internal energy, but said temperature instead.

Or here:
Decoherence of the fullerene matter waves can be induced by heating the molecules with multiple laser beams (514.5 nm, 40 µm waist radius, 0 − 10 W) before they enter the interferometer. The resulting molecular temperature can be assessed by detecting the heating dependent fraction of fullerene ions using the electron multiplier D1 over the heating stage.
Do you think they could have used the term "beam temperature" and it would have just meant the same thing?

But then they MUST mean the temperature of single fullerenes here:
The laser heating increases the molecular temperature by 140 K per absorbed photon. We calculate that they reach up to 5000 K for very short times, but the re-emission of thermal photons is so efficient that even the hottest molecules are cooled to below∼ 3000 K when they enter the interferometer 7.2 cm behind the heating stage.
But they then sort of talk about the way they calculated these temperatures:
FIG. 3: Spectral photon emission rate R of C70 molecules, as used for the calculation of thermal decoherence. We use the published [25] absorption cross-section for (S0 !S1) and a heat capacity of CV = 202kB. The fall-off to short wavelengths is determined by the limited internal energy of the molecules, while the decrease at long wavelengths is due to the lack of accessible radiative transitions at energies below 1.5 eV. The figure shows that in the absence of cooling a single molecule at 2500 K travelling at 190 m s−1 (that is, with a transit time of 4 ms through the interferometer) would emit an integrated number of three visible photons. This is sufficient to determine the path of the molecule if the emission occurs close to the second grating.
Is that heat capacity they are talking about a "molecular heat capacity"?

I'm convinced now, of course, that these folks are talking about the temperature of single fullerene molecules, but am I being too presumptuous in thinking that "molecular temperature" (or atomic or nuclear) cannot mean the same thing as traditional bulk temperature? They do talk later about molecular analogs to blackbody radiation, thermionic emission, and evaporative cooling, and it is obvious to me how these analogies are drawn, so the temperature they speak of is merely a molecular analog and not the same thing as a bulk temperature.

Is it like thermal entropy vs. informational entropy where people use the same word to actually mean two different (but maybe analogous) things?
  Reply With Quote
image image
Reply
Thread Tools


Similar Threads for: What is meant by "molecular temperature"?
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What is Meant by Time & Space Being "Continuous"? Adam Khan Special & General Relativity 13 May28-08 08:09 AM
"standard perturbation theory" - what exactly is meant? omg! Quantum Physics 0 May24-08 08:04 AM
What is meant by "signal-to-noise ratio?" nktvnvn General Engineering 15 Jun26-05 02:39 PM
in math, what is sometimes meant by "Analysis" marcus Calculus & Analysis 7 Oct28-03 10:35 PM
In 1998 "Hubble volume" meant a cube 12 billion LY on a side marcus General Physics 10 May17-03 10:05 AM

Powered by vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. © 2009 Physics Forums
Sciam | physorgPhysorg.com Science News Partner
image
image   image