Liquid Collision Rate: Estimating Molecular Flux

AI Thread Summary
In kinetic theory, liquids are treated as incompressible substances with freely moving atoms. The discussion focuses on deriving an expression for molecular flux, defined as the rate of collisions per unit area with a surface, rather than between individual molecules. To estimate this flux, one must calculate the area swept by molecules in the liquid over time. The inquiry suggests that methodologies used for gases might be applicable, referencing a specific section in a lecture on gas properties for potential guidance. Understanding these principles is essential for accurately estimating molecular collision rates in liquids.
aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
In kinetic theory a liquid is viewed as an incompressible substance in which the atoms are free to move. I would like to know how to find an expression for the molecular flux in a liquid. By molecular flux I mean the collisions per unit area, where collision refers not to the collision between individual molecules but to the collision with a general surface.
I hope that was understandable, but just to make sure I will elaborate. I want to find the rate at which a molecule hits a cluster of n molecules of area A, so to do that I will somehow need to estimate what area is swept over by the molecules in the liquid per unit time.
 
Physics news on Phys.org

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

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?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

The effects of absolute zero temperature
Replies
14
Views
4K
B Understanding Friction: The Impact of Inter-Molecular Bonding on Movement
Replies
2
Views
1K
B Why does ice have more friction when it's solid compared to when it's melting?
Replies
11
Views
2K
Understanding pressure in a liquid
Replies
15
Views
5K
Why are there few atomic/molecular collisions at LEO level?
Replies
1
Views
1K
Exactly how do pressure waves work at the molecular level?
Replies
49
Views
4K
Feynman's explanation of atomic collisions in gas
Replies
4
Views
1K
What Drives Surface Tension in Liquids?
Replies
3
Views
2K
I Why pressure stays the same when doubling both volume and temperature?
Replies
35
Views
4K
Ideal Gas in Piston (Constant Pressure vs Rate of collision)
Replies
2
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top