Statistical mechanics, bernoulli's forumula - collision freqency

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of collision frequency in statistical mechanics, specifically referencing Kubo's formula. The formula indicates that collision frequency is derived from the ratio of momentum to the product of mass and distance. A clarification is made regarding the round-trip distance a molecule travels between collisions, emphasizing that it should account for the distance to only one wall. The participant realizes their mistake in counting the distance to both walls. The thread concludes with a question about whether to close the discussion.
AirTycoon
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello,
I am having trouble understanding collision frequency in following discussion from Kubo,
EtOMYXp.png


$$collision\ frequency = \frac{1}{\frac{l}{v_{x}}}=\frac{p_{x}}{ml}$$

What am I missing ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Between two collisions against the same wall, a molecule must travel a round-trip distance equal to twice the width of the container.
 
ah. I was counting the opposite wall too. Thank You.

ps. Should I close this thread now ?
 

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 Bernoulli principle from the perspective of statistical mechanics
Replies
1
Views
1K
Bernoulli equation derivation with added mechanical work
Replies
13
Views
3K
Inelastic collision for equal masses
Replies
6
Views
2K
MIT OCW 8.01 PS11.3: Elastic Collision Between Ball and Pivoted Rod
Replies
10
Views
2K
Impulse and perfectly inelastic collision between 2 points
Replies
4
Views
729
Estimating Pitch & Volume of Collision Sounds
Replies
14
Views
3K
A Pair of interacting systems, driven coupled harmonic oscillators
Replies
7
Views
2K
I Tracing parabolic motion with only current velocity and position?
Replies
2
Views
1K
I Modeling a Bottle Rocket: Analyzing the Maximum Altitude
Replies
4
Views
5K
Estimation of the power in a received radio signal
Replies
24
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top