Temperature as a measure of the kinetic energy of molecules

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of temperature as a measure of kinetic energy, particularly in the context of gases, solids, and liquids. Participants explore whether temperature in solids and liquids also reflects potential energy, and how this relates to the kinetic energy of molecules.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Exploratory

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants question the assumption that temperature is solely a measure of kinetic energy in solids and liquids, considering the role of potential energy. Some express uncertainty about how movement relates to temperature and heat conduction.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the definitions and implications of temperature, with some participants offering insights into kinetic theory and the relationship between kinetic energy and temperature. Multiple interpretations of temperature are being discussed, particularly in relation to potential energy.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention constraints such as the need for simpler experimental methods to measure molecular velocities and the historical context of temperature definitions prior to the kinetic energy connection.

Karol
Messages
1,380
Reaction score
22

Homework Statement


I know that temperature is a measure of the kinetic energy of gas molecules. at a given temperature different gases have the same average kinetic energy.
But in solids and liquids there is also potential energy between the close atoms/molecules. how do i know that temperature is here also a measure only of the kinetic energy? maybe it is a measure of part of the potential energy also?

Homework Equations


Kinetic energy of different gases at 00C in Jouls:
Hydrogen: 5.6E-21
helium: 5.6E-21
nitrogen: 5.6E-21
...

The Attempt at a Solution


Because potential energy is static, it doesn't affect the movement, so we can assume that what happens in gases is the same in metals and liquids
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Karol said:

Homework Statement


I know that temperature is a measure of the kinetic energy of gas molecules. at a given temperature different gases have the same average kinetic energy.
But in solids and liquids there is also potential energy between the close atoms/molecules. how do i know that temperature is here also a measure only of the kinetic energy? maybe it is a measure of part of the potential energy also?

Is this the question you are being asked, or that you are asking?

Karol said:
2. Homework Equations
Karol said:
Kinetic energy of different gases at 00C in Jouls:
Hydrogen: 5.6E-21
helium: 5.6E-21
nitrogen: 5.6E-21
...

The Attempt at a Solution


Because potential energy is static, it doesn't affect the movement, so we can assume that what happens in gases is the same in metals and liquids

And, is this your answer?
 
I ask if in solids and liquids also the temperature is a measure only of the kinetic energy and not of the potential energy as well.
In gases there is almost no potential energy because of the large distances between the molecules.
I tried to explain my opinion in The attempt at a solution
 
Karol said:
Because potential energy is static, it doesn't affect the movement, so we can assume that what happens in gases is the same in metals and liquids
Yes, but can you fill in a bit more of the argument? Why is it movement that determines temperature? Think about how heat conducts.
 
I don't know why movement determines temperature, although i (think i) know that molecules from a warm area move faster and hit other molecules near by which deliver forward this fast movement. it's called conduction.
 
I think the textbook definition of temperature is solely kinetic energy, but there are times when potential energy can be called a "temperature". This is not the same temperature, though. One example where I've seen it used this way is in a setup for optical tweezers. You shine a laser on a molecule, and it moves to the center of the beam (or wherever the high intensity point is). I think the reason this gets called a temperature is because the molecule moves along the potential gradient (which does work), thus actually increasing the kinetic energy of the molecule. The "temperature" function here is essentially the potetential function. Whether or not this is a good way to look at it, I don't know, but it definitely helped to understand how the setup was working.
 
Karol said:
I don't know why movement determines temperature, although i (think i) know that molecules from a warm area move faster and hit other molecules near by which deliver forward this fast movement. it's called conduction.
Yes, but also what happens to the fast moving molecule when it hits slower ones?
 
Oh, the fast ones, i guess, slow down, so the body cools
 
Karol said:
Oh, the fast ones, i guess, slow down, so the body cools
Certainly the KE is shared out - until what point? Does that sound like what temperature does?
 
  • #10
Until the whole lump has the same KE, and temperature also shares out until all parts have the same temp.
This shows they are direct proportionally related, but it's not yet a proof.
But i have another question. i heard that the kinetic theory of gases relates pressure and volume to average kinetic energy, but has anyone actually measured the velocities of molecules in gas? how do you do that?
 
  • #11
Karol said:
Until the whole lump has the same KE, and temperature also shares out until all parts have the same temp.
This shows they are direct proportionally related, but it's not yet a proof.
How do you think temperature is defined?
Karol said:
i heard that the kinetic theory of gases relates pressure and volume to average kinetic energy, but has anyone actually measured the velocities of molecules in gas? how do you do that?
It probably depends on what you mean by direct measurement. E.g. you could infer it from Doppler shifts in spectra.
 
  • #12
I read from the site hyperphysics and they define temperature as related to kinetic energy.
By direct measurement of velocity of molecules i mean a simpler experiment than a Doppler shift in spectra, a more classical one with less sophisticated equipment and preferably one that was made long ago...
 
  • #13
Karol said:
I read from the site hyperphysics and they define temperature as related to kinetic energy.
That makes it easy. But temperature was discussed by physicists before the KE connection was known. At that time, it would have been based on the observations that (1) the hotness of a body can be measured in a consistent way by expansion of a liquid, and (2) that objects which measure differently on that scale, placed adjacently, come to be equal. If you define it in those terms, and you have a theory of atoms and molecules as mobile particles, then transfer of KE is a persuasive model.
Karol said:
By direct measurement of velocity of molecules i mean a simpler experiment than a Doppler shift in spectra, a more classical one with less sophisticated equipment and preferably one that was made long ago...
That would be very challenging even now. You cannot see the molecules, so how direct can that be?
 
  • #14
Thanks
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K