What Is the Relation of Chemical Potentials in Hydrogen Atom Ionization?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship of chemical potentials in the context of hydrogen atom ionization, specifically examining the equation ##μ_H=μ_p+μ_e##. Participants are exploring the implications of Gibbs free energy in relation to chemical potentials during ionization processes.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants question whether the problem should specify "at equilibrium" and discuss the implications of chemical potential dependence on particle number. Others explore the formulation of Gibbs free energy in relation to multiple species and the application of the Gibbs-Duhem equation.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights into the definitions and relationships between chemical potentials and Gibbs free energy. There is a focus on clarifying the conditions under which these relationships hold, particularly at equilibrium.

Contextual Notes

Participants are considering the implications of missing information regarding equilibrium conditions and the assumptions related to the dependence of chemical potentials on the number of particles.

cozycoz

Homework Statement


In hydrogen atom ionization H→p+e show that ##μ_H=μ_p+μ_r##

Homework Equations


G=μN (N is the number of particles)

The Attempt at a Solution


(1) I think the question should say "Find chemical potential relation AT EQUILIBRIUM", don't you think?
(2) My professor said that because ##dN_H=-dN_p=-dN_e=dN##, the change of gibbs energy becomes dG=μ_HdN_H+μ_pdN_p+μ_edN_e<br /> =(μ_H-μ_p-μ_e)dN And the equilibrium occurs when dG=0, we can derive above relation.
But chemical potential also depends on N, so I think I can't simply write dG as above(cause extra ##\frac{∂μ}{∂N}N## terms should be included). How do you think?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When there are several species, each has its own chemical potential so the total Gibbs free energy has to be written as:

G = μH NH + μp Np + μe Ne
 
I think that, from the Gibbs-Duhem equation, we know that, at equilibrium, $$N_Hd\mu_H+N_pd\mu_p+N_ed\mu_e=0$$. This is pretty much the same thing that @Lord Jestocost said.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DrClaude and Lord Jestocost
Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but I think where @cozycoz is getting hung up is the notion that
$$dG \neq \mu dN + Nd\mu$$
but rather
$$dG = \mu dN$$
The best way I can think to explain this is to look at the definition of ##G##: ##G = U-TS+pV##. Here, the dependence on ##\mu## and ##N## is entirely contained within the definition of internal energy ##U##. But ##U## is defined as a function of extensive variables only: ##U = U(S,V,N)##. So taking the total differential of ##U## gives;
$$dU = \frac{\partial U}{\partial S}dS + \frac{\partial U}{\partial V}dV +\frac{\partial U}{\partial N}dN$$
and we define ##\frac{\partial U}{\partial S} \equiv T##, ##\frac{\partial U}{\partial V} \equiv p##, ##\frac{\partial U}{\partial N} \equiv \mu##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DrClaude
TeethWhitener said:
Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but I think where @cozycoz is getting hung up is the notion that
$$dG \neq \mu dN + Nd\mu$$
For a single chemical species at equilibrium, this should be an equality, since, from the Clausius-Duhem equation, $$-SdT+VdP+Nd\mu=0$$
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
10K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K