Question about the relation b/w mean free path and other variables

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between the mean free path (λ) and the mean distance between nearest neighbors (r) in a gas, highlighting the formula λ ≈ 1/(nσ), where n is the density of molecules and σ is the collision cross-section. The participant grapples with the physical justification for equating the volume swept by a moving molecule with the volume of neighboring cubes, ultimately realizing that under uniform density assumptions, both shapes can be treated similarly. The conversation emphasizes that the derivation of the mean free path is somewhat loosely defined and not rigorously applicable to all atomic motions. The participant expresses a need for more guidance from instructors in understanding these concepts. Overall, the discussion reveals the complexities of deriving physical relationships in gas dynamics.
FallenLeibniz
Messages
86
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


The problem that I am having stems from a problem given in the following way:[/B]
"a)Show that for a gas, the mean free path ##\lambda## between collisions is related to the mean distance between nearest neighbors ##r## by the approximate relation ##\lambda \approx r\frac{r^2}{\sigma}## where ##sigma## is the collision cross section."​

Homework Equations


a)Equation relating mean free path to molecule density and cross sectional area:
##\lambda \approx \frac{1}{n\sigma}##
---n is the number of molecules/number of collisions in a volume V that's
swept by the molecule during its travel
---##\sigma## is the collision cross section defined as ##\pi(2R)^2## where R is the radius of the molecule modeled as a sphere.​

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]After hours of working with it, I finally found that I can get the author's solution if I set the volume swept by the molecule approximately equal to the N cubes of length r...

##V_{swept_cyl} \approx V_{cubes}##
##(2\pi)(\sigma)(N)(\lambda) \approx N(r^3)##

However, I fail to see how this is totally justified in a physical context. Is it that we estimate that the cylinder is filled with those r length cubes as on average they (the neighbors) will be "about" that r distance away from the molecules the traveling one hits?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
When ## n ## is the density of atoms (targets), the number of collisions ## N ##, (assuming the target atoms stay stationary), when another atom travels a distance ## s ## is given by ## N=n s \sigma ## because ## s \sigma ## is the volume that is traversed. (The cross section ## \sigma ## is the projected area of the atom that is moving that is able to cause a collision, with the other atoms considered as points. ## \sigma ## could also be viewed as the area of overlap.) The ## s ## corresponding to ## N=1 ## is the mean free path ## \lambda ##. This gives ## \lambda=\frac{1}{n \sigma} ##. For atoms with density ## n ##, if they are in a cubic array, each atom occupies a volume ## v=R^3 ##, where ## R ## is the nearest neighbor distance, so that density ## n=\frac{1}{R^3} ##, which gives ## \frac{1}{n}=R^3 ## . ## \\ ## As a homework helper, the rules say I am not supposed to give you the answer, but you put sufficient effort into the problem, and it really shouldn't have been so difficult=the instructor could perhaps have given some more coaching if you got stuck. ## \\ ## And also note: The mean free path formula ## \lambda=\frac{1}{n \sigma} ## is somewhat loosely derived with the conditions set above. I believe this is the generally accepted way of deriving it, and it isn't supposed to be tremendously mathematically rigorous and necessarily applying to the general case with all of the atoms in motion.
 
Last edited:
Charles Link said:
When ## n ## is the density of atoms (targets), the number of collisions ## N ##, (assuming the target atoms stay stationary), when another atom travels a distance ## s ## is given by ## N=n s \sigma ## because ## s \sigma ## is the volume that is traversed. (The cross section ## \sigma ## is the projected area of the atom that is moving that is able to cause a collision, with the other atoms considered as points. ## \sigma ## could also be viewed as the area of overlap.) The ## s ## corresponding to ## N=1 ## is the mean free path ## \lambda ##. This gives ## \lambda=\frac{1}{n \sigma} ##. For atoms with density ## n ##, if they are in a cubic array, each atom occupies a volume ## v=R^3 ##, where ## R ## is the nearest neighbor distance, so that density ## n=\frac{1}{R^3} ##, which gives ## \frac{1}{n}=R^3 ## . ## \\ ## As a homework helper, the rules say I am not supposed to give you the answer, but you put sufficient effort into the problem, and it really shouldn't have been so difficult=the instructor could perhaps have given some more coaching if you got stuck. ## \\ ## And also note: The mean free path formula ## \lambda=\frac{1}{n \sigma} ## is somewhat loosely derived with the conditions set above. I believe this is the generally accepted way of deriving it, and it isn't supposed to be tremendously mathematically rigorous and necessarily applying to the general case with all of the atoms in motion.

@Charles Link: I do thank you for your reply. It's much appreciated. I wasn't looking so much for the answer as the fact that setting the volumes equal could be just written down on paper enough. More or less, I was wondering the physical justification from behind the derivation. But, I do get it now with regard to the density. If you assume the density is uniform throughout, a cube and a cylinder in the same space are going to have about the same density at the mean, so you can treat them as about equal.

To be honest, I'm actually doing self-study (prep for a computational phys course I'm doing this Fall), so in this case, my instructor was just about as clueluess as I was. :)
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link
The book claims the answer is that all the magnitudes are the same because "the gravitational force on the penguin is the same". I'm having trouble understanding this. I thought the buoyant force was equal to the weight of the fluid displaced. Weight depends on mass which depends on density. Therefore, due to the differing densities the buoyant force will be different in each case? Is this incorrect?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K