Can the van der Waals coefficients be negative in the van der Waals equation for real gases? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) 2019 Moderator Election Q&A - Question CollectionHigh pressure modification to the van der Waals equationDoes the van der Waals equation remain valid when repulsive intermolecular forces dominate?Van der Waals real gas equationvan der Waals equation of state constantsDeriving an alternative expression for the Van der Waals equation using given parametersDerivation of the van der Waals equationValidity of van der Waals equationCalculating Compressibility factor from the Van der Waals' Gas equationvan der Waals equation for deviation of gases from ideal behaviorVan der Waals forces

Recursive calls to a function - why is the address of the parameter passed to it lowering with each call?

Network questions

How can I introduce the names of fantasy creatures to the reader?

Can gravitational waves pass through a black hole?

Are Flameskulls resistant to magical piercing damage?

Why isn't everyone flabbergasted about Bran's "gift"?

Would I be safe to drive a 23 year old truck for 7 hours / 450 miles?

Lights are flickering on and off after accidentally bumping into light switch

Why did Bronn offer to be Tyrion Lannister's champion in trial by combat?

2 sample t test for sample sizes - 30,000 and 150,000

tabularx column has extra padding at right?

Is Bran literally the world's memory?

Trying to enter the Fox's den

What is the evidence that custom checks in Northern Ireland are going to result in violence?

A journey... into the MIND

What helicopter has the most rotor blades?

Does the Pact of the Blade warlock feature allow me to customize the properties of the pact weapon I create?

Why does BitLocker not use RSA?

Etymology of 見舞い

Pointing to problems without suggesting solutions

Does using the Inspiration rules for character defects encourage My Guy Syndrome?

Reflections in a Square

Why are two-digit numbers in Jonathan Swift's "Gulliver's Travels" (1726) written in "German style"?

Can a Knight grant Knighthood to another?



Can the van der Waals coefficients be negative in the van der Waals equation for real gases?



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)
2019 Moderator Election Q&A - Question CollectionHigh pressure modification to the van der Waals equationDoes the van der Waals equation remain valid when repulsive intermolecular forces dominate?Van der Waals real gas equationvan der Waals equation of state constantsDeriving an alternative expression for the Van der Waals equation using given parametersDerivation of the van der Waals equationValidity of van der Waals equationCalculating Compressibility factor from the Van der Waals' Gas equationvan der Waals equation for deviation of gases from ideal behaviorVan der Waals forces










5












$begingroup$



A gas described by van der Waals equation has the pressure that is lower than the pressure exerted by the same gas behaving ideally. True or false?




My approach



$$P(textideal) = P(textreal) + P(textchanges due to intermolecular forces)$$



So the pressure of real gas can be more as well as less than that if a gas behaving ideally depending on whether intermolecular forces are repulsive or attractive in nature.



Doubts



  1. The answer to the question is given as True. So I want to understand what is wrong about my approach.


  2. Since the intermolecular forces depend on $a$, for attractive nature $a$ is positive. Is $a$ negative for repulsive nature of forces?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Upon further thought, I have an explanation of why what I am thinking is wrong. The constant 'a' only describes attractive forces while the constant 'b' describes repulsive forces. So by definition 'a' cannot be negative. Can anyone tell me if this is correct? I'm still unsure about the 1st doubt.
    $endgroup$
    – Groverkss
    6 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    Rather, b does not address repulsive forces, but the volume of molecules that is neglected in the ideal gas equation. As consequence, the gas has higher pressure, as collisions with volume walls are more frequent.
    $endgroup$
    – Poutnik
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Poutnik Isn't repulsive forces and volume neglected the same thing? I think that volume occupied is due to repulsive forces between atoms. I may be wrong, can you clarify?
    $endgroup$
    – Groverkss
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    No, it is not due repulsive forces. Neither for ideal gas, neither for real gas. Bigger own volume = lower fre volume = more frequent wall collisions.
    $endgroup$
    – Poutnik
    5 hours ago















5












$begingroup$



A gas described by van der Waals equation has the pressure that is lower than the pressure exerted by the same gas behaving ideally. True or false?




My approach



$$P(textideal) = P(textreal) + P(textchanges due to intermolecular forces)$$



So the pressure of real gas can be more as well as less than that if a gas behaving ideally depending on whether intermolecular forces are repulsive or attractive in nature.



Doubts



  1. The answer to the question is given as True. So I want to understand what is wrong about my approach.


  2. Since the intermolecular forces depend on $a$, for attractive nature $a$ is positive. Is $a$ negative for repulsive nature of forces?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Upon further thought, I have an explanation of why what I am thinking is wrong. The constant 'a' only describes attractive forces while the constant 'b' describes repulsive forces. So by definition 'a' cannot be negative. Can anyone tell me if this is correct? I'm still unsure about the 1st doubt.
    $endgroup$
    – Groverkss
    6 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    Rather, b does not address repulsive forces, but the volume of molecules that is neglected in the ideal gas equation. As consequence, the gas has higher pressure, as collisions with volume walls are more frequent.
    $endgroup$
    – Poutnik
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Poutnik Isn't repulsive forces and volume neglected the same thing? I think that volume occupied is due to repulsive forces between atoms. I may be wrong, can you clarify?
    $endgroup$
    – Groverkss
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    No, it is not due repulsive forces. Neither for ideal gas, neither for real gas. Bigger own volume = lower fre volume = more frequent wall collisions.
    $endgroup$
    – Poutnik
    5 hours ago













5












5








5





$begingroup$



A gas described by van der Waals equation has the pressure that is lower than the pressure exerted by the same gas behaving ideally. True or false?




My approach



$$P(textideal) = P(textreal) + P(textchanges due to intermolecular forces)$$



So the pressure of real gas can be more as well as less than that if a gas behaving ideally depending on whether intermolecular forces are repulsive or attractive in nature.



Doubts



  1. The answer to the question is given as True. So I want to understand what is wrong about my approach.


  2. Since the intermolecular forces depend on $a$, for attractive nature $a$ is positive. Is $a$ negative for repulsive nature of forces?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$





A gas described by van der Waals equation has the pressure that is lower than the pressure exerted by the same gas behaving ideally. True or false?




My approach



$$P(textideal) = P(textreal) + P(textchanges due to intermolecular forces)$$



So the pressure of real gas can be more as well as less than that if a gas behaving ideally depending on whether intermolecular forces are repulsive or attractive in nature.



Doubts



  1. The answer to the question is given as True. So I want to understand what is wrong about my approach.


  2. Since the intermolecular forces depend on $a$, for attractive nature $a$ is positive. Is $a$ negative for repulsive nature of forces?







physical-chemistry gas-laws






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 5 hours ago









andselisk

19.6k666128




19.6k666128










asked 6 hours ago









GroverkssGroverkss

727




727











  • $begingroup$
    Upon further thought, I have an explanation of why what I am thinking is wrong. The constant 'a' only describes attractive forces while the constant 'b' describes repulsive forces. So by definition 'a' cannot be negative. Can anyone tell me if this is correct? I'm still unsure about the 1st doubt.
    $endgroup$
    – Groverkss
    6 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    Rather, b does not address repulsive forces, but the volume of molecules that is neglected in the ideal gas equation. As consequence, the gas has higher pressure, as collisions with volume walls are more frequent.
    $endgroup$
    – Poutnik
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Poutnik Isn't repulsive forces and volume neglected the same thing? I think that volume occupied is due to repulsive forces between atoms. I may be wrong, can you clarify?
    $endgroup$
    – Groverkss
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    No, it is not due repulsive forces. Neither for ideal gas, neither for real gas. Bigger own volume = lower fre volume = more frequent wall collisions.
    $endgroup$
    – Poutnik
    5 hours ago
















  • $begingroup$
    Upon further thought, I have an explanation of why what I am thinking is wrong. The constant 'a' only describes attractive forces while the constant 'b' describes repulsive forces. So by definition 'a' cannot be negative. Can anyone tell me if this is correct? I'm still unsure about the 1st doubt.
    $endgroup$
    – Groverkss
    6 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    Rather, b does not address repulsive forces, but the volume of molecules that is neglected in the ideal gas equation. As consequence, the gas has higher pressure, as collisions with volume walls are more frequent.
    $endgroup$
    – Poutnik
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Poutnik Isn't repulsive forces and volume neglected the same thing? I think that volume occupied is due to repulsive forces between atoms. I may be wrong, can you clarify?
    $endgroup$
    – Groverkss
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    No, it is not due repulsive forces. Neither for ideal gas, neither for real gas. Bigger own volume = lower fre volume = more frequent wall collisions.
    $endgroup$
    – Poutnik
    5 hours ago















$begingroup$
Upon further thought, I have an explanation of why what I am thinking is wrong. The constant 'a' only describes attractive forces while the constant 'b' describes repulsive forces. So by definition 'a' cannot be negative. Can anyone tell me if this is correct? I'm still unsure about the 1st doubt.
$endgroup$
– Groverkss
6 hours ago





$begingroup$
Upon further thought, I have an explanation of why what I am thinking is wrong. The constant 'a' only describes attractive forces while the constant 'b' describes repulsive forces. So by definition 'a' cannot be negative. Can anyone tell me if this is correct? I'm still unsure about the 1st doubt.
$endgroup$
– Groverkss
6 hours ago













$begingroup$
Rather, b does not address repulsive forces, but the volume of molecules that is neglected in the ideal gas equation. As consequence, the gas has higher pressure, as collisions with volume walls are more frequent.
$endgroup$
– Poutnik
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
Rather, b does not address repulsive forces, but the volume of molecules that is neglected in the ideal gas equation. As consequence, the gas has higher pressure, as collisions with volume walls are more frequent.
$endgroup$
– Poutnik
5 hours ago












$begingroup$
@Poutnik Isn't repulsive forces and volume neglected the same thing? I think that volume occupied is due to repulsive forces between atoms. I may be wrong, can you clarify?
$endgroup$
– Groverkss
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
@Poutnik Isn't repulsive forces and volume neglected the same thing? I think that volume occupied is due to repulsive forces between atoms. I may be wrong, can you clarify?
$endgroup$
– Groverkss
5 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
No, it is not due repulsive forces. Neither for ideal gas, neither for real gas. Bigger own volume = lower fre volume = more frequent wall collisions.
$endgroup$
– Poutnik
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
No, it is not due repulsive forces. Neither for ideal gas, neither for real gas. Bigger own volume = lower fre volume = more frequent wall collisions.
$endgroup$
– Poutnik
5 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















5












$begingroup$

This question requires a simplistic notion of real gas behavior.



The van der Waals equation was based on the notion that "real" gas particles occupy some volume, and have an attraction to each other. Thus the volume correction $b$ is negative in the equation and the pressure correction, $a$ is positive. The formula is



$$(P + a/V_mathrmm^2)(V_mathrmm -b) = RT$$



If you look at a table of van der Waals constants all the a and b terms are positive. Thus the volume calculated using the van der Waals equation will always be less than the volume calculated using the ideal gas equation.



The rest of the story...



The van der Waals equation isn't the best equation for corrections, particularly near the critical point for the gas. There are numerous other "real gas equations" which predict gas behavior better. (I'm not sure of what gas and what conditions, but there has to be a gas which has greater volume than would be predicted by ideal gas behavior.)






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "431"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f113161%2fcan-the-van-der-waals-coefficients-be-negative-in-the-van-der-waals-equation-for%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    5












    $begingroup$

    This question requires a simplistic notion of real gas behavior.



    The van der Waals equation was based on the notion that "real" gas particles occupy some volume, and have an attraction to each other. Thus the volume correction $b$ is negative in the equation and the pressure correction, $a$ is positive. The formula is



    $$(P + a/V_mathrmm^2)(V_mathrmm -b) = RT$$



    If you look at a table of van der Waals constants all the a and b terms are positive. Thus the volume calculated using the van der Waals equation will always be less than the volume calculated using the ideal gas equation.



    The rest of the story...



    The van der Waals equation isn't the best equation for corrections, particularly near the critical point for the gas. There are numerous other "real gas equations" which predict gas behavior better. (I'm not sure of what gas and what conditions, but there has to be a gas which has greater volume than would be predicted by ideal gas behavior.)






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$

















      5












      $begingroup$

      This question requires a simplistic notion of real gas behavior.



      The van der Waals equation was based on the notion that "real" gas particles occupy some volume, and have an attraction to each other. Thus the volume correction $b$ is negative in the equation and the pressure correction, $a$ is positive. The formula is



      $$(P + a/V_mathrmm^2)(V_mathrmm -b) = RT$$



      If you look at a table of van der Waals constants all the a and b terms are positive. Thus the volume calculated using the van der Waals equation will always be less than the volume calculated using the ideal gas equation.



      The rest of the story...



      The van der Waals equation isn't the best equation for corrections, particularly near the critical point for the gas. There are numerous other "real gas equations" which predict gas behavior better. (I'm not sure of what gas and what conditions, but there has to be a gas which has greater volume than would be predicted by ideal gas behavior.)






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$















        5












        5








        5





        $begingroup$

        This question requires a simplistic notion of real gas behavior.



        The van der Waals equation was based on the notion that "real" gas particles occupy some volume, and have an attraction to each other. Thus the volume correction $b$ is negative in the equation and the pressure correction, $a$ is positive. The formula is



        $$(P + a/V_mathrmm^2)(V_mathrmm -b) = RT$$



        If you look at a table of van der Waals constants all the a and b terms are positive. Thus the volume calculated using the van der Waals equation will always be less than the volume calculated using the ideal gas equation.



        The rest of the story...



        The van der Waals equation isn't the best equation for corrections, particularly near the critical point for the gas. There are numerous other "real gas equations" which predict gas behavior better. (I'm not sure of what gas and what conditions, but there has to be a gas which has greater volume than would be predicted by ideal gas behavior.)






        share|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        This question requires a simplistic notion of real gas behavior.



        The van der Waals equation was based on the notion that "real" gas particles occupy some volume, and have an attraction to each other. Thus the volume correction $b$ is negative in the equation and the pressure correction, $a$ is positive. The formula is



        $$(P + a/V_mathrmm^2)(V_mathrmm -b) = RT$$



        If you look at a table of van der Waals constants all the a and b terms are positive. Thus the volume calculated using the van der Waals equation will always be less than the volume calculated using the ideal gas equation.



        The rest of the story...



        The van der Waals equation isn't the best equation for corrections, particularly near the critical point for the gas. There are numerous other "real gas equations" which predict gas behavior better. (I'm not sure of what gas and what conditions, but there has to be a gas which has greater volume than would be predicted by ideal gas behavior.)







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited 3 hours ago

























        answered 5 hours ago









        MaxWMaxW

        15.9k22261




        15.9k22261



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Chemistry Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f113161%2fcan-the-van-der-waals-coefficients-be-negative-in-the-van-der-waals-equation-for%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Log på Navigationsmenu

            Creating second map without labels using QGIS?How to lock map labels for inset map in Print Composer?How to Force the Showing of Labels of a Vector File in QGISQGIS Valmiera, Labels only show for part of polygonsRemoving duplicate point labels in QGISLabeling every feature using QGIS?Show labels for point features outside map canvasAbbreviate Road Labels in QGIS only when requiredExporting map from composer in QGIS - text labels have moved in output?How to make sure labels in qgis turn up in layout map?Writing label expression with ArcMap and If then Statement?

            Nuuk Indholdsfortegnelse Etyomologi | Historie | Geografi | Transport og infrastruktur | Politik og administration | Uddannelsesinstitutioner | Kultur | Venskabsbyer | Noter | Eksterne henvisninger | Se også | Navigationsmenuwww.sermersooq.gl64°10′N 51°45′V / 64.167°N 51.750°V / 64.167; -51.75064°10′N 51°45′V / 64.167°N 51.750°V / 64.167; -51.750DMI - KlimanormalerSalmonsen, s. 850Grønlands Naturinstitut undersøger rensdyr i Akia og Maniitsoq foråret 2008Grønlands NaturinstitutNy vej til Qinngorput indviet i dagAntallet af biler i Nuuk må begrænsesNy taxacentral mødt med demonstrationKøreplan. Rute 1, 2 og 3SnescootersporNuukNord er for storSkoler i Kommuneqarfik SermersooqAtuarfik Samuel KleinschmidtKangillinguit AtuarfiatNuussuup AtuarfiaNuuk Internationale FriskoleIlinniarfissuaq, Grønlands SeminariumLedelseÅrsberetning for 2008Kunst og arkitekturÅrsberetning for 2008Julie om naturenNuuk KunstmuseumSilamiutGrønlands Nationalmuseum og ArkivStatistisk ÅrbogGrønlands LandsbibliotekStore koncerter på stribeVandhund nummer 1.000.000Kommuneqarfik Sermersooq – MalikForsidenVenskabsbyerLyngby-Taarbæk i GrønlandArctic Business NetworkWinter Cities 2008 i NuukDagligt opdaterede satellitbilleder fra NuukområdetKommuneqarfik Sermersooqs hjemmesideTurist i NuukGrønlands Statistiks databankGrønlands Hjemmestyres valgresultaterrrWorldCat124325457671310-5