Kinetic Theory of Gases: Momentum Change & Force

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the kinetic theory of gases, specifically focusing on the relationship between momentum change, force, and the assumptions regarding time in the context of molecular collisions with the walls of a cubic container. Participants explore the implications of different interpretations of time in the equations governing these interactions.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the kinetic theory equation relating pressure to momentum change and force, suggesting that the time in the equation should represent the time taken for a molecule to collide with the wall rather than the time taken to traverse the container.
  • Another participant argues that the total force on the wall is based on the rate of change of momentum of all particles, which depends on the average time taken for particles to travel the distance of 2L.
  • A third participant questions why the time used in calculating forces is not the collision time, referencing the formula for force as the change in momentum over the change in time.
  • A later reply clarifies that the calculation involves averaging the force over time, suggesting that individual collision events create a complex force profile that is not the focus of the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriate interpretation of time in the context of momentum change and force calculations. There is no consensus on whether the time should be defined as the collision time or the time taken for a molecule to travel across the container.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for clarity regarding the definitions of time in the equations and the implications of averaging forces over time. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the correct interpretation of these concepts.

science_world
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
The kinetic theory of gas state that p=(1/3)(N)(m)(u^2)/(V).
In one step of its derivative related to change of momentum and force given to the wall (Refer to Cubic Container and molecule movement in x,y,z axes in attachment), the equation is given by:

change in momentum / time = force
delta(p) / (2L/u) = F
2mc / (2L/u) = F
(m)(u^2) / (L) = F

*L= length of cube
m = mass of one molecule
u = velocity of one molecule in x axis

This equation assume that "time" means [time taken for the molecule to move from one side of cube to the other side and back to the first side (2L= distance traveled)] divided by [velocity of molecule = u].

I think this is a wrong assumptions. Time for rate of momentum change actually means the time in which the force take to change the momentum of a particle. This means time in the above equations should be [time when force by wall change the momentum of particle, in other words the collision time] not [time taken to move from one side to another side].

Someone please do explain this. Thank you.

Picture in attachment by Ensmilvideo as seen in Youtube.com
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.jpg
    Untitled.jpg
    31.2 KB · Views: 449
  • Untitled 2.jpg
    Untitled 2.jpg
    25.4 KB · Views: 459
Physics news on Phys.org


The total force on the wall is the rate of change of momentum of all the particles taken together. That rate will depend on the frequency each particle strikes the wall, on average, and that depends on the time to travel 2L.
 


But, in usual cases, such as calculating forces given by an object to a wall, the time used is time taken in collision, not time taken for the object to move from a point to that wall and back to that point again. Why it doesn't apply here?

Refer to formula: delta p / delta t = F
delta t is collision time. This formula is also used in kinetic theory of gases.
 


Because what is being calculated is the average force over time. If you could look at a perfectly detailed graph of force v time you'd see it made up of gazillions of separate tiny pulses, but that's not of interest.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
15K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K