Question about Gibbs free energy from Kubos' Thermodynamics

In summary, the problem involves determining the common tangent of a plot of Gibbs free energy per mole of a two component system as a function of molar ratio. The solution uses the Gibbs-Duhem relation and the Clausius-Duhem equation to derive the conditions for a common tangent to be drawn and for two phases to coexist. The identities in the solution are derived algebraically by setting x=x1 and using the equations for partial molar free energy and the relationship between x1 and x2.
  • #1
MathematicalPhysicist
Gold Member
4,699
371
Advanced Problems textbook.
(It's on pages 212-213).
I'll post the question and following it the solution in the book:
The question:
The Gibbs free energy per mole of a two component system is given by:
##\bar{G}(x)=x_1\bar{G}_1+x_2\bar{G}_2##.
Here ##x_1## and ##x_2## are the molar ratios of the components 1 and , and ##\bar{G}_1## and ##\bar{G}_2## are chemical potentials per mole, respectively.
Show that, if the plot of ##\bar{G}(x)## (##x=x_1## or ##x_2##) as a function of ##x_1## has a common tangent ##Q'Q''##, the states between ##Q'Q''## separate into two phases, ##Q'## and ##Q''##.

The Solution:
Set ##x=x_1##. From the Gibbs-Duhem relation, ##x_1\partial \bar{G}_1/\partial x_1 + x_2 \partial \bar{G}_2/\partial x_1 = 0##, we have:

[tex](1) \ \ \ \ \ \ \frac{\partial \bar{G}}{\partial x_1}= \bar{G}_1+(dx_2/dx_1)\bar{G}_2+x_1 \partial \bar{G}_1/\partial x_1+x_2\partial \bar{G}_2/\partial x_1 = \bar{G}_1-\bar{G}_2. [/tex]

If the values of the functions at ##x_1'## and ##x_1''## are denoted by ' and '', the condition that a common tangent ##Q'Q''## can be drawn is:

[tex](2) \ \ \ \ \ \ \bar{G}_1'-\bar{G}_2'=\bar{G}_1''-\bar{G}_2''=\frac{\bar{G}''-\bar{G}'}{x_1''-x_1'}[/tex]
Using ##\bar{G}= x_1\bar{G}_1+x_2\bar{G}_2##, we get from ##(2)##:
$$\bar{G}'_1-\bar{G}'_2 = \bar{G}''_1-\bar{G}''_2=\frac{x_1''\bar{G}_1''+x_2''\bar{G}_2''-x_1'\bar{G}_1'-x_2'\bar{G}_2'}{x_1''-x_1'}$$

from which we get:
$$\frac{x_1'\bar{G}'_1-x_1'\bar{G}_2'}{x_1'}=\frac{-x_1''\bar{G}_1''+x_1''\bar{G}_2''}{-x_1''} = \frac{x_1''\bar{G}_1''+x_2''\bar{G}_2''-x_1'\bar{G}'_1-x_2'\bar{G}'_2}{x_1''-x_1'}$$
$$= \frac{\bar{G}_2''-\bar{G}_2'}{0},$$
and
$$\frac{-x_2'\bar{G}_1'+x_2'\bar{G}_2'}{-x_2'}=\frac{x_2''\bar{G}''_1-x_2''\bar{G}_2''}{x_2''}=\frac{x_1''\bar{G}''_1+x_2''\bar{G}_2''-x_1'\bar{G}_1'-x_2'\bar{G}_2'}{x_1''-x_1'}$$
$$=\frac{\bar{G}_1''-\bar{G}_1'}{0}.$$

This means that:
[tex](3) \ \ \ \ \ \bar{G}_1'=\bar{G}_1'' \ \ \ \ and \bar{G}_2'=\bar{G}_2''[/tex]

which is equivalent to (2). (If (3) is valid, (2) is obviously valid.) Eq. (3) is the condition that two phases with different molar concentrations (denoted by single and double primes) can coexist.
Thus a system that has a density ##x_1## between ##Q'## and ##Q''## separates into two phases with the ratio of:

[tex](4)\ \ \ \ \ \ C'=\frac{x_1''-x_1}{x_1''-x_1'}, C''=\frac{x_1-x_1'}{x_1''-x_1'},[/tex]

and its free energy (point Q in figure 4.5) is lower than ##\bar{G}(x)## (point R in fig. 4.5).
In other words:
$$(5)\ \ \ \ \ \ C'\bar{G}'+C''\bar{G}''<\bar{G}(x).$$

What I don't understand is how did they arrive at the identities with ##\frac{\bar{G}_1''-\bar{G}_1'}{0}## and ##\frac{\bar{G}_2''-\bar{G}_2'}{0}##?

I am perplexed as to what is going on with this problem really,does anyone know?
 
Science news on Phys.org
  • #2
Are you able to sketch of the graph that depicts how the molar average G is varying with x in this situation?
 
  • #3
@Chestermiller the figure is given in figure 4.5 in the book.

I still don't see how did they derive those identities, did they derive it from the figure or algebraically?
 
  • #4
MathematicalPhysicist said:
@Chestermiller the figure is given in figure 4.5 in the book.

I still don't see how did they derive those identities, did they derive it from the figure or algebraically?
I haven't gone through the derivation yet, but, from your knowledge, it should be clear to you that the partial molar free energies of each of the two species at the two tangential points must be equal, correct?
 
  • #5
Chestermiller said:
I haven't gone through the derivation yet, but, from your knowledge, it should be clear to you that the partial molar free energies of each of the two species at the two tangential points must be equal, correct?
From what does it follow that:"the partial molar free energies of each of the two species at the two tangential points must be equal"?
 
  • #6
MathematicalPhysicist said:
From what does it follow that:"the partial molar free energies of each of the two species at the two tangential points must be equal"?
$$\bar{G}=x_1\bar{G}_1+x_2\bar{G}_2$$
So, $$\bar{G}=x_1\bar{G}_1+(1-x_1)\bar{G}_2=\bar{G}_2+(\bar{G}_1-\bar{G}_2)x_1\tag{1}$$
If we evaluate the change in ##\bar{G}## between two adjacent points separated by a change of ##dx_1## along this curve, we obtain: $$d\bar{G}=(\bar{G}_1-\bar{G}_2)dx_1+x_1d\bar{G_1}+x_2d\bar{G_2}$$ But, from the Clausius-Duhem equation, the sum of the 2nd and 3rd terms on the right hand side of this equation are zero. Therefore, along this curve, the slope of the tangent line is ##(\bar{G}_1-\bar{G}_2)## at each point. So Eqn. 1 must also be the equation for the straight line tangent to the curve at that point (holding ##\bar{G}_1## and ##\bar{G}_2## constant along the line). And the intercepts of this line with x1= 0 and x1=1 must be the partial molar free energies of the substance at the point. So this is a graphical method of determining the partial molar free energies as a function of mole fraction, if the relationship between ##\bar{G}## and ##x_1## is known.
 
  • Like
Likes Lord Jestocost
  • #7
Yes, I believe you have just repeated what was written in the book in the first few paragraphs, just notifying me that we have: ##x_1+x_2=1## which really eluded me, thanks for that.

But I still don't understand what comes after that, i.e. between: "from which we get:" and equation (3).

How did they get the equalities: ##(\bar{G}_2''-\bar{G}'_2)/0## and the second equality with 1 replacing 2?

I thought that because of the equality: ##\frac{-x_1''\bar{G}_1''+x_1''\bar{G}_2''}{-x_1''} = \frac{x_1''\bar{G}_1''+x_2''\bar{G}_2'' - x_1'\bar{G}_1'-x_2'\bar{G}_2'}{x_1''-x_1'}##, after multiplying by ##-x_1''(x_1''-x_1')## the two hands of this equation I get:

$$x_1''^2\bar{G}_2''-x_1''^2\bar{G}_1''-x_1'x_1''\bar{G}_2''+x_1'x_1''\bar{G}_1''=-x_1''^2\bar{G}_1''-x_1''x_2''\bar{G}_2''+x_1''x_1'\bar{G}_1'+x_1''x_2'\bar{G}_2'$$
After rearranging and noticing that: ##x_1'+x_2'=1=x_1''+x_2''## I get
$$x_1'' \bar{G}_2''-x_1'x_1''\bar{G}_2''+x_1'x_1''\bar{G}_1''=x_1''x_1'\bar{G}_1'+x_1''x_2'\bar{G}_2'$$

What else should I do to derive these last two identities in my first OP in the solution's quote?
 
  • #8
Ah, wait a minute I can reduce the last RHS to ##x_1''\bar{G}'## and the LHS to: ##x_1''x_2'\bar{G}_2''+x_1'x_1''\bar{G}_1''##.

But how to proceed from here?
 
  • #9
I'm not going to spend my time trying to figure out what they did because, in my view, it's unnecessarily complicated. Here is my simpler assessment:

If the straight line is tangent to the curve of ##\bar{G}## vs ##x_1## at two points, ##x_1'## and ##x_1''##, then two alternate forms of the equation for this same straight line are $$\bar{G}=\bar{G}_2'+(\bar{G}_1'-\bar{G}_2')x_1'$$ and $$\bar{G}=\bar{G}_2''+(\bar{G}_1''-\bar{G}_2'')x_1''$$But, since it is the same straight line, the intercepts in these equations at ##x_1=0## and ##x_1=1## must be identical. Therefore,

$$\bar{G}_2'=\bar{G}_2''$$and $$\bar{G}_1'=\bar{G}_1''$$

These are the conditions for equilibrium of the two states at the tangent points.
 
  • Like
Likes MathematicalPhysicist
  • #10
OK, thanks.

BTW, why do you call the relation Clausisus-Duhem and not Gibbs-Duhem?

Did he find it earlier than Gibbs?
 
  • #11
MathematicalPhysicist said:
OK, thanks.

BTW, why do you call the relation Clausisus-Duhem and not Gibbs-Duhem?

Did he find it earlier than Gibbs?
Nope. Just terminology confusion on my part.
 

1. What is Gibbs free energy and how is it related to Kubos' Thermodynamics?

Gibbs free energy is a thermodynamic function that measures the amount of useful work that can be extracted from a system at constant temperature and pressure. It is related to Kubos' Thermodynamics through the equation: ∆G = ∆H - T∆S, where ∆G is the change in Gibbs free energy, ∆H is the change in enthalpy, T is the temperature, and ∆S is the change in entropy.

2. How is Gibbs free energy different from enthalpy and entropy?

Gibbs free energy takes into account both enthalpy and entropy in its measurement, while enthalpy only considers heat energy and entropy only considers disorder. Additionally, Gibbs free energy can determine the spontaneity of a process, whereas enthalpy and entropy cannot.

3. What is the significance of Gibbs free energy in chemical reactions?

Gibbs free energy is used to determine the spontaneity of a chemical reaction. If ∆G is negative, the reaction is spontaneous and can occur without an external energy source. If ∆G is positive, the reaction is non-spontaneous and requires an external energy source to occur. If ∆G is zero, the reaction is at equilibrium.

4. Can Gibbs free energy be used to predict the direction of a reaction?

Yes, Gibbs free energy can be used to predict the direction of a reaction. A negative ∆G indicates that the reaction will proceed forward, while a positive ∆G indicates that the reaction will proceed in the reverse direction. When ∆G is zero, the reaction is at equilibrium and no net change will occur.

5. How is Gibbs free energy related to equilibrium constant?

The relationship between Gibbs free energy and equilibrium constant is given by the equation ∆G = -RTlnK, where R is the gas constant and T is the temperature in Kelvins. This equation shows that as ∆G becomes more negative, the equilibrium constant (K) increases, indicating a greater amount of products at equilibrium. Conversely, as ∆G becomes more positive, the equilibrium constant decreases, indicating a greater amount of reactants at equilibrium.

Similar threads

  • Electromagnetism
Replies
2
Views
848
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
697
Replies
1
Views
806
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
Back
Top