Why is diffusion coefficient = 1/2?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the choice of the diffusion coefficient D being set to 1/2 in the context of a one-dimensional random walk and Fick's second law. It is explained that D can be defined based on units, allowing for flexibility in its numerical value. The choice of 1/2 simplifies the resulting Gaussian solution, yielding a variance of t, which is a standard form for diffusion problems. The Fourier transform method confirms that with D set to 1/2, the solution becomes a normal distribution with mean 0 and variance t. This choice is thus favored for its mathematical convenience in diffusion equations.
Old Guy
Messages
101
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


I'm working with a 0ne-dimensional random walk and looking at Fick's second law, below. All I've read seems to take D = 1/2 as a given for ordinary diffusion, but where does this come from? Is there a way to derive it?


Homework Equations


<br /> \frac{\partial }<br /> {{\partial t}}p\left( {x,t} \right) = D\frac{{\partial ^2 }}<br /> {{\partial x^2 }}p\left( {x,t} \right)<br />


The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
Essentially D defines your units, so you are allowed to choose any numerical value. I guess people choose 1/2 because then the "usual" solution is a Gaussian with variance t (instead of √(2Dt)).
 
Last edited:
Thank you, but can you expand on your answer a bit? Not sure I understand what you mean in your second sentence.
 
You know how to solve diffusion equation with Fourier transforms, right? The result is
p = \frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi Dt}} \exp(-x^2/4Dt)
so if you choose D = 1/2, this becomes a normal distribution with mean 0 and variance t.
 
Of course, now I get it! Thank you.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top