Proving a triple point (Thermodynamics)

AI Thread Summary
A one-component system must have a triple point, as demonstrated through Gibbs' Phase Rule, which states that the degrees of freedom (F) are calculated as F = C - P + 2. In a one-component system, with C equal to 1, the presence of three phases results in F being zero, indicating that all three phases coexist at a specific temperature and pressure. The analysis shows that with one phase, two variables can vary freely, while with two phases, they must vary along a curve. The requirement that ΔHfusion is greater than zero supports the existence of distinct phase transitions. Thus, the proof hinges on the application of Gibbs' Phase Rule and the nature of phase equilibria in thermodynamics.
ebunny91
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Prove that a on-component system must have a triple point. You may assume that ΔHfusion>0, if needed.


Homework Equations



C (components) = #of distinct substances - # of distinct chemical reactions

Gibbs Phase Rule: degrees of freedom= components - phases + 2 or (F=C-P+2)

The Attempt at a Solution



In a one-component system, c=1.

I know that when only one phase is present, F= 1 component - 1 phase + 2 = 2. So 2 variables (temperature or pressure) can be varied without changing the phase of the substance. This is the sold, liquid or gas regions in the phase diagram.

When two phases are present, F= 1 component - 2 phases + 2 = 1. So both variables (temperature and pressure) must be varied together along a certain curve to not change the phase of the substance. This is the melting point curve, sublimation curve or boiling point curve in phase diagrams.

Now, when three phases are present, F= 1 component - 3 phases + 2 = 0. So there are no degrees of freedom present, which means that the 3 phases can only be present at once at only one temperature and pressure.

The question is asking me to prove that one component systems must have a triple point and assume that ΔHfusion>0 (if needed). How do I go about doing that with the given equations, or any other ones that I may have missed?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can't you just use Gibbs' phase rule? Or is the idea to show Gibbs' phase rule is true?
 
Yea I think I have to prove the Gibbs Phase Rule (somehow using something about ΔHfusion)
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top