Collision Theory: Deriving Rate Equation Confusion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Yuqing
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Collision Theory
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the assumptions made in collision theory regarding particle collisions and reaction rates. It questions the validity of assuming that a particle collides with every other particle within its collision volume, suggesting this leads to an overestimation of successful reactions. The argument is made that if a particle reacts during its first collision, it cannot react again, thus the expected number of successful collisions should be considered instead. The conversation emphasizes the need to analyze the rate of reaction from an ensemble perspective, focusing on how many particles collide and the fraction that successfully reacts. Overall, the confusion arises from the interpretation of collision rates versus actual successful reactions in a dynamic system.
Yuqing
Messages
216
Reaction score
0
I was reading a derivation of the rate equation from collision theory and there is one thing which confuses me a bit. In the derivation we assume that a particle will collide with every particle within its "collision volume" but it seems to me that this is a gross overestimate of the actual number of collisions. My reasoning is that if the particle successfully reacts during the first collision, then it will have only made 1 collision, and similarly with successive collisions. So shouldn't we instead be using an expected number of collisions rather than just saying the particle will collides with everything it has access to. This problem is then emphasized because we next multiple the number of collisions by the number of particles which seems to just blow up the error further. Am I getting confused on something here?
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
Collision theory is predicting the initial rate of reaction before a significant amount of reactant has reacted. Obviously as the concentration of reactant decreases as it is depleted by the reaction, the rate of reaction will decrease.
 
I realize that, but the problem I'm describing appears to be different. Suppose a particle makes 1000 collisions per second and that 10% of these are "successful" collisions (i.e. reactive). In theory, a single particle can only make 1 successful collision since it'll have reacted and will be unable to perform additional reactions. But this theory seems to suggest that there will be 100 successful collisions, that is a single particle can produce 100 reactant molecules.
 
Think of it from the point of view of an ensemble. Say you have one million particles. Now we should consider the following questions to think about the rate of reaction: (1) after x amount of time, how many of these particles will have collided with another particle? and (2) what fraction of those colliding particles will successfully react? Here the rate of collision of 1000 collisions per second does not mean that we're assuming the particle will have 1000 collisions. It means we expect uncreated particles to collide once approximately every millisecond.
 
It seems like a simple enough question: what is the solubility of epsom salt in water at 20°C? A graph or table showing how it varies with temperature would be a bonus. But upon searching the internet I have been unable to determine this with confidence. Wikipedia gives the value of 113g/100ml. But other sources disagree and I can't find a definitive source for the information. I even asked chatgpt but it couldn't be sure either. I thought, naively, that this would be easy to look up without...
I was introduced to the Octet Rule recently and make me wonder, why does 8 valence electrons or a full p orbital always make an element inert? What is so special with a full p orbital? Like take Calcium for an example, its outer orbital is filled but its only the s orbital thats filled so its still reactive not so much as the Alkaline metals but still pretty reactive. Can someone explain it to me? Thanks!!
Back
Top