- #1

- 41

- 0

Now my question is, since in the kinetic theory , we are considering the collisions of

**atoms or molecules**, why does classical theory give accurate results? In view of the

**uncertainity principle**,Ideally, Quantum theory should be applied?

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter manofphysics
- Start date

- #1

- 41

- 0

Now my question is, since in the kinetic theory , we are considering the collisions of

- #2

- 2,483

- 100

- #3

- 550

- 2

For example, the assumption that the spaces between molecules are so much larger than the sizes of the molecules that it's nearly the case that molecules exert no forces on each other except very briefly during collisions, and collisions are elastic, so you can use a statistical description of independent particles traveling in straight lines most of the time, and having a normal distribution of speeds, random amounts of x,y and z components of velocity, their collisions with walls being the underlying cause of pressure on the walls, etc. Most of these assumptions and line of reasoning in the kinetic theory are not dependent on whether you have classical particles or quantum mechanics.

One exception would be the calculation of a mean free path (mean distance between collisions among molecules) with a formula that has been derived with the assumption that molecules are spheres. I don't know the amount of error introduced by treating molecules as classical spheres. It is often assumed for much of the kinetic theory that molecules are geometric points, having zero probability of colliding with one another, and colliding only with the walls, but then this point mass assumption has to be dropped to permit an estimation of the mean free path.

Share: