Paper detail

Deviations from Arrhenius dynamics in high temperature liquids, a possible collapse, and a viscosity bound

Liquids realize a highly complex state of matter in which strong competing kinetic and interaction effects come to life. As such, liquids are more challenging to understand than either gases or solids generally. In weakly interacting gases, the kinetic effects dominate. By contrast, low temperature solids typically feature far smaller fluctuations about their ground state. Notwithstanding their complexity, with the exception of quantum fluids and supercooled liquids, various aspects of common liquid dynamics such as their dynamic viscosity are often assumed to be given by rather simple, Arrhenius-type, activated forms with nearly constant (i.e., temperature independent) energy barriers. In this work, we analyze experimentally measured viscosities of numerous liquids far above their equilibrium melting temperature to see how well this assumption fares. We find, for the investigated liquids, marked deviations from simple activated dynamics. Even far above their equilibrium melting temperatures, as the temperature drops, the viscosity of these liquids increases more strongly than predicted by activated dynamics dominated by a single uniform energy barrier. For metallic fluids, the scale of the prefactors of the best Arrhenius fits for the viscosity is typically consistent with that given by the product $nh$ with $n$ the number density and $h$ Planck's constant. In various fluids that we examined, $nh$ constitutes a lower bound scale on the viscosity. We find that a scaling of the temperature axis (complementing that of the viscosity) leads to a partial collapse of the temperature dependent viscosities of different fluids; such a scaling allows for a functional dependence of the viscosity on temperature that includes yet is far more general than activated Arrhenius form alone. We speculate on relations between non-Arrhenius dynamics and thermodynamic observables.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.