Virial Theorem and Equipartition Theorem

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between the Virial Theorem and the Equipartition Theorem, specifically focusing on the derivation of the formula <\sum_i \vec{r}_i \vec{F}_i > = -p \oint{\vec{r} d\vec{S}}. Participants clarify that the internal forces in an ideal gas cancel out, leaving only the external forces exerted by the wall. The averaging process involves calculating the contributions from molecules near a small patch of area dS, leading to the conclusion that the average force on the surface is -pd\mathbf S, which integrates over the entire surface to yield the stated formula.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Virial Theorem
  • Familiarity with the Equipartition Theorem
  • Knowledge of pressure and molecular forces
  • Basic calculus for integration and averaging
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Virial Theorem in detail
  • Explore the implications of the Equipartition Theorem in thermodynamics
  • Learn about molecular dynamics simulations to visualize molecular interactions
  • Investigate the mathematical techniques for averaging in statistical mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of thermodynamics, and researchers interested in statistical mechanics and molecular interactions will benefit from this discussion.

Derivator
Messages
147
Reaction score
0
Hi folks,

in this book (correct page should open, if not: p.199): http://books.google.com/books?id=12...r thermodynamics&pg=PA199#v=onepage&q&f=false

it says (formula (7.168)):

&lt;\sum_i \vec{r}_i \vec{F}_i &gt; = -p \oint{\vec{r} d\vec{S}}

It is explained, why dF=-p dS, but I don't see the connection between the mean value of the sum on the left hand side and the ring integral on the right hand side.


derivator
 
Science news on Phys.org
The trick is that in the sum on the left-hand side, you take all the forces, internal and external(due to the wall). It turns out that the internal forces cancel out and you are left with the forces due to that wall. Now averaging can be performed on the surface of the wall, which allow you to reformulate the sum as an integral of the surface forces -pdS.
 
Jano L. said:
Now averaging can be performed on the surface of the wall, which allow you to reformulate the sum as an integral of the surface forces -pdS.

Hi,

could you please explain a litle bit more detailed, how this averaging is done? That is, why is the given integral an approximation to the left ahnd side average of the sum?

best,
derivator
 
Because the pressure p is an approximate expression for the molecular forces the wall exerts on molecules. I think writing the averaging procedure formally is not so easy, but it is obvious that the result is the integral given above. Try to write it and let us know!
 
Hi Derivator,
I've just came across the virial theorem and realized that what I wrote earlier is not correct. In fact, the internal forces do not cancel out generally. For the ideal gas, however, there are only contact forces during the collisions, so they cancel out. The only contribution to the sum is due to external forces. Here is the derivation:
The sum has nonzero contributions only from the molecules being repulsed by the wall in the instant considered (only these molecules feel external force of the wall). We choose some small patch of area dS and calculate the contribution by the molecules near this patch. The average force on the surface dS is

-pd\mathbf S,

so the contribution is

\sum_i \mathbf r_i \mathbf F_i (i near \Delta S) \approx - \mathbf r p \Delta S


here \mathbf r is the radius vector of the patch. Finally we sum the contributions from all possible patches sovering the surface enclosing the gas:

\sum_i \mathbf r_i \mathbf F_i (whole surface) \approx -\oint p d\mathbf S

Sorry for text formulae, but tex wouldn't work properly.

Jano
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 333 ·
12
Replies
333
Views
19K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K