What prevents infinite potential with Nernst Equation

AI Thread Summary
The Nernst equation includes a log Q term, which can approach infinity if the concentration of ions on one side of a membrane nears zero, leading to potential inaccuracies. As ion concentration decreases, the driving force for diffusion increases, but the equation's predictions may not hold true at very low concentrations. The log function's sublinear nature complicates the relationship between concentration and EMF, suggesting that other factors may limit voltage output in real-world scenarios. Additionally, at low ion concentrations, the exchange current density drops, affecting the electrochemical behavior and rendering the equation less reliable. This raises questions about the observed voltage in galvanic cells under such conditions.
Gama
Messages
5
Reaction score
3
The nernst equation has a log Q term. The denominator of that could be very close to zero. That would make Q close to infinity and log Q close to infinity. How high can the EMF be due to concentration in the real world and why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The Nernst equation is E = \frac{R T}{z F} \ln\frac{[\text{ion outside cell}]}{[\text{ion inside cell}]}.

As the concentration of ions on one side of the membrane goes down (towards zero), the driving force on ions on the other side of the membrane goes up- that's simple diffusion. Since the log function is sublinear, I'ts not clear what you are having problems with.
 
I wasn't thinking of membranes in particular. The log of infinity is infinity. My guess is the limiting factor is some other half reaction or diffusion of ions from one side of a battery to the other. Even if this is the case the Nernst equation makes it appear that a much higher voltage can be obtained from a concentration gradient than I think can occur.
 
I would imagine the Nernst equation loses accuracy at low ion concentrations. The physics would change and the equation would no longer be correct.

Wiki (not the most authoritative source, I realize) seems to agree:


At very low concentrations of the potential determining ions, the potential predicted by Nernst equation tends to ±infinity. This is physically meaningless because, under such conditions, the exchange current density becomes very low, and then other effects tend to take control of the electrochemical behavior of the system.
 
How would you explain a 0.1V current when the concentration of copper ions in solution is 0M ?

This is in a zinc || copper galvanic cell (with salt bridge) and the [Zn2+] is 1M?

I thought that the copper ions attract the electrons? Am I mistaken?
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top