How to approach this Brownian Motion Problems

xiaozegu
Messages
16
Reaction score
0

Attachments

  • L@X%60QP9MHGXO$3%25KNOFF%7D]7.jpg
    L@X%60QP9MHGXO$3%25KNOFF%7D]7.jpg
    20.1 KB · Views: 521
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do you think there's a difference? Isn't it just the universal gas constant in both cases?
 
clamtrox said:
Why do you think there's a difference? Isn't it just the universal gas constant in both cases?

Is Bolye's law's Ra equal to the R in the PV=NRT?
Bolye's law is PV = RaT
 
xiaozegu said:
Is Bolye's law's Ra equal to the R in the PV=NRT?
Bolye's law is PV = RaT

Sorry, but that's gibberish. Read more carefully what is done.

The ideal gas law is PV = nRT, where n is the number of moles of gas, V is volume, p is pressure, T is temperature and R is the gas constant.

The form used in the book you quote has instead v = V/n, volume per mole, and reads Pv = RT.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
clamtrox said:
Sorry, but that's gibberish. Read more carefully what is done.

The ideal gas law is PV = nRT, where n is the number of moles of gas, V is volume, p is pressure, T is temperature and R is the gas constant.

The form used in the book you quote has instead v = V/n, volume per mole, and reads Pv = RT.

Thanks. But I still do not know how to interpret the n and n0 in the after equation. Isn't n is 1 mol?
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...

Similar threads

Back
Top