Difference between rate and frequency?

AI Thread Summary
Rate and frequency of collisions are not the same, particularly in the context of molecular collisions. Frequency implies a periodic occurrence, while rate is a broader term that can refer to various measurements, including speed. In molecular collisions, "rate of collisions" is more appropriate since these events are not periodic. The discussion highlights that frequency has a time reference, whereas rate can encompass a wider range of concepts. Therefore, in scientific contexts, it's important to choose the term that accurately reflects the nature of the events being described.
Iceified
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Is rate of collision and frequency of collision the same ? In what ways are they different ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Iceified said:
Is rate of collision and frequency of collision the same ? In what ways are they different ?
Collisions of WHAT? And in what context? I would say that yes, they are likely to be the same but "rate" is a bit vague whereas "frequency" is a more solid technical term relating to how often something occurs over and over again. That is "rate" could be used to mean speed and other things (as in rate of decay, rate of travel, etc.) in addition to a "rate of collision" (which in any case sounds very awkward)
 
phinds said:
Collisions of WHAT? And in what context? I would say that yes, they are likely to be the same but "rate" is a bit vague whereas "frequency" is a more solid technical term relating to how often something occurs. That is "rate" could be used to mean speed and other things (as in rate of decay, rate of travel, etc.)
Collisions of molecules. Can the terms be used interchangeably? Thanks.
 
Iceified said:
Collisions of molecules. Can the terms be used interchangeably? Thanks.
Ah ... well that's a bit of a different story. Collisions of molecules are not periodic motion so I think "rate of collisions" is better than "frequency of collisions" since frequency connotes periodic.
 
  • Like
Likes davenn and DrClaude
phinds said:
Ah ... well that's a bit of a different story. Collisions of molecules are not periodic motion so I think "rate of collisions" is better than "frequency of collisions" since frequency connotes periodic.
On the other hand "frequency" connotes a time reference where "rate" (from the root word "ratio") connotes something that can be more generic (e.g "a defect rate of 10 problems per car coming off the assembly line"). One might want to use the more specific term rather the more generic when describing a time-based rate.
 
This is from Griffiths' Electrodynamics, 3rd edition, page 352. I am trying to calculate the divergence of the Maxwell stress tensor. The tensor is given as ##T_{ij} =\epsilon_0 (E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} E^2)+\frac 1 {\mu_0}(B_iB_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} B^2)##. To make things easier, I just want to focus on the part with the electrical field, i.e. I want to find the divergence of ##E_{ij}=E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij}E^2##. In matrix form, this tensor should look like this...
Thread 'Applying the Gauss (1835) formula for force between 2 parallel DC currents'
Please can anyone either:- (1) point me to a derivation of the perpendicular force (Fy) between two very long parallel wires carrying steady currents utilising the formula of Gauss for the force F along the line r between 2 charges? Or alternatively (2) point out where I have gone wrong in my method? I am having problems with calculating the direction and magnitude of the force as expected from modern (Biot-Savart-Maxwell-Lorentz) formula. Here is my method and results so far:- This...
Back
Top