Timeline for Principle of detailed balance
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 24, 2017 at 11:47 | vote | accept | user8277998 | ||
| Jul 21, 2017 at 11:29 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackChemistry/status/888360368048709632 | ||
| Jul 20, 2017 at 13:15 | answer | added | porphyrin | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jul 20, 2017 at 6:17 | comment | added | orthocresol | Interesting question. It doesn't make sense to talk about a fully irreversible reaction (which has no reverse rate constants), when also asserting that the forward and reverse rates of each step must be the same. The matter at hand seems to be more subtle than that. Quoting from the Wikipedia page that Karl linked: "... one represents irreversible reactions as limits of reversible steps [...] not all reaction mechanisms with irreversible reactions can be obtained as limits of systems or reversible reactions with detailed balance". | |
| Jul 20, 2017 at 6:09 | history | edited | orthocresol | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 26 characters in body
|
| Jul 20, 2017 at 5:50 | history | edited | andselisk♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Fixed typos
|
| Jul 20, 2017 at 0:15 | comment | added | Alchimista | What I am surprised of, is that I never encountered the terminology before. Still we said that such a cycle would violate the second law. Is it no so? | |
| Jul 19, 2017 at 22:25 | comment | added | Ben Norris | Note that the proof is that irreversible cycle $\ce{A -> B -> C -> A}$ is not possible. Zhe's comment describes a reversible process. | |
| Jul 19, 2017 at 22:19 | comment | added | Mithoron | Yes, I think the problem is irreversibility here. | |
| Jul 19, 2017 at 21:43 | comment | added | Zhe | Whoa, whoa. The steps are supposed to be irreversible? My example does not at all conform to that. @Tyberius I'll think about the reaction again in this context. | |
| Jul 19, 2017 at 20:16 | comment | added | Tyberius♦ | @Zhe according to the Wikipedia page linked by Karl, Rudolf Wegscheider proved such a reaction scheme wasn't possible. I doubt the statement is wrong, so my guess is the confusion arises due to the scheme described by Wegscheider not matching what you provided. | |
| Jul 19, 2017 at 20:04 | comment | added | Zhe | So, technically speaking, you could imagine $\ce{IBrClC-CH2Cl}$. There are three staggered conformations that could interconvert in exactly the reaction scheme provided. They are all in equilibrium. This essentially refutes the statement from the book. | |
| Jul 19, 2017 at 19:36 | comment | added | Karl | The whole thing looks like this en.wikipedia.org/wiki/… and I am not sure what point they are trying to make. | |
| Jul 19, 2017 at 19:14 | history | edited | user8277998 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 83 characters in body
|
| Jul 19, 2017 at 19:06 | history | asked | user8277998 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |