Time of Impact of Gas Molecules on the Inner Wall of a Pressure Vessel

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between gas molecule collisions and pressure exerted on the walls of a pressure vessel. It highlights the confusion regarding the time of impact versus the time between successive collisions, emphasizing that the time of impact is crucial for understanding momentum change and pressure. A hypothetical scenario is presented where molecules collide once with the wall, generating a pressure pulse, but this does not reflect steady-state pressure conditions. The conversation also points out that steady-state pressure is derived from the average effects of numerous collisions over time. Ultimately, understanding the average frequency and nature of these collisions is essential for accurate pressure calculations.
Zahid Iftikhar
Messages
121
Reaction score
24
In derivation of relation for pressure of Gas ,(see pic below) the time for rate of change of momentum of molecules should be the time for which the wall of the vessel and the molecules kept interacting with each other, not the time between successive collisions. As circumscribed below, my confusion is how the time between two such collisions can be equal to the time of impact between the wall and the molecules. The time of impact has actually caused the change of momentum, thereby causing the pressure. I further argue, that let us suppose there are 100 or so molecules colliding just once on the wall, bounce back, and then never return (just assume), during this one-time collision, pressure has been exerted on the wall of the vessel. In this case, there is no time between successive collisions involved. I would be obliged if learned people on this forum help me to understand. High regards
Zahid
1622899741635.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Zahid Iftikhar said:
I further argue, that let us suppose there are 100 or so molecules colliding just once on the wall, bounce back, and then never return (just assume), during this one-time collision, pressure has been exerted on the wall of the vessel.

In that case you would get a force exerted on the wall, and of course you could divide that force by the wall's area and get a pressure. But it would be a pressure pulse, and would last for a very short time. In that case, your reasoning is correct.

But if you go back and carefully read the derivation of the expression for the pressure of a gas in a box, you should see it stated that we are interested in a steady state pressure. There is a huge number of molecules colliding with the wall, and we are interested in the average pressure exerted on the wall due to the collisions. In this case we are interested in how often they collide and the number of such collisions.

There's a chapter-end problem in some textbooks where machine gun bullets are fired at Superman's chest. It's the same situation as above. To get the average force exerted on Superman we look at the frequency of collisions and the number and nature of the collisions.
 
Last edited:
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/
Back
Top