Very basic form of the diffusion law for gasses

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the diffusion law for gases, specifically the equation ##J=D \vec{\nabla} \vec{n}##, where ##D=\frac{v_{th}l}{3}##. The participant seeks a simplified proof suitable for early undergraduates, emphasizing the importance of the factor of 1/3, which is often overlooked in basic treatments. References to Feynman's lectures highlight the complexity involved in deriving this factor correctly. The participant expresses frustration with existing resources that either oversimplify the derivation or fail to provide adequate explanations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic thermodynamics and kinetic theory of gases
  • Familiarity with the concepts of particle current density and concentration gradients
  • Knowledge of thermal agitation velocity and mean free path
  • Basic mathematical skills for manipulating equations and understanding vector notation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the diffusion law in kinetic theory of gases
  • Review Feynman's Lectures on Physics, particularly section 43-5
  • Explore advanced treatments of diffusion that address the factor of 1/3
  • Investigate resources on particle transport phenomena in gases
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for undergraduate physics students, educators teaching thermodynamics, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of gas diffusion laws.

Coffee_
Messages
259
Reaction score
2
I'm looking for a proof of the following statement at a level an early undergrad would understand:

##J=D \vec{\nabla} \vec{n}## where ##D=\frac{v_{th}l}{3}## with ##l## being the mean free path and ##v_{th}## the thermal agitation velocity, ##J## is the particle current density.

I really did try google a lot but no luck. Either the proof is way too complicated for me to understand or it just tells the results without work. I'm looking for a very raw/approximating derivation that doesn't really have to be formal at all, something that can be understood in like 10 minutes, hard assumptions are allowed. I would really appreciate it if someone who knows where I can find one, could inform me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
To get the correct factor of 1/3 apparently requires a lot of work. The treatments that I have seen at the undergraduate level make approximations that simplify the argument but end up getting the wrong numerical factor. They then just state that a more refined treatment will yield the 1/3. See for example Feynman's lectures http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_43.html especially section 43-5.
 
TSny said:
To get the correct factor of 1/3 apparently requires a lot of work. The treatments that I have seen at the undergraduate level make approximations that simplify the argument but end up getting the wrong numerical factor. They then just state that a more refined treatment will yield the 1/3. See for example Feynman's lectures http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_43.html especially section 43-5.

I see, this is exactly the answer I was looking for. The reason why I'm asking is that in class I remember some very very handwaving derivation that got the wrong factor. When I then looked up the law it had a different factor and I thought we were just blatantly wrong.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K