Does Water Evaporate Differently in a Beaker vs. a Pan Under a Bell Jar?

AI Thread Summary
In a system with a beaker and a shallow pan both containing distilled water and enclosed by a bell jar, the question arises whether water evaporates differently from the beaker compared to the pan. The beaker has a higher water level, leading to a potential energy difference, but this difference is negligible when compared to thermal energy. The energy of vaporization for water molecules is significantly higher than the gravitational potential energy at the top of the water column. Therefore, there is no tendency for water to preferentially evaporate from the beaker. The overall conclusion is that evaporation rates are not influenced by the height of the water column in this setup.
Mike_In_Plano
Messages
700
Reaction score
35
The following is something that puzzles me a bit, and I'd appreciate some insight in the matter.
Thank You :)

Given the following:
A shallow pan with a smaller diameter beaker sitting in it's center
Both the pan and the beaker contain distilled water
The level of the water in the beaker is substantially high than that in the pan
The pan and beaker are additionally enclosed by a bell jar (with an id = to the od of the pan)
The bell jar is evacuated until only water vapor remains
The system starts at a uniform temperature, say room temperature
The system ends at the same temperature via thermal conductivity of a plate that the pan sets on.

Here's my question:
Does the beaker loose water to evaporation while the pan gains the water? After all, the water at the top of the beaker is at a higher potential energy than that at the top of the pan.

Thanks for your considerations,

Mike
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maybe it would help to consider the following:

Thermal energy (kT) at room temperature is 4 * 10^-21 J.
Gravitational potential energy (mgh) for water atoms at the top of a 1-meter high column is 3*10^-25 J.
Energy of vaporization for a water molecule: 7 *10^-20 J.

The amount of potential energy is negligible in comparison to thermal energy, so there is no tendency for water to preferentially evaporate from the column.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
4K
Back
Top