- #1
paweld
- 255
- 0
Chemical potential of a substance i in an ideal solution is given by:
[tex] \mu_i = \mu_i^0 + RT \log x_i [/tex]
(where [tex] \mu_i^0 [/tex] is a chemical potential of pure substance i and
[tex] x_i[/tex] is mole fraction of i)
In nonideal solution [tex] x_i [/tex] has to be exchanged with activity coefficient [tex]a_i [/tex]:
[tex] \mu_i = \mu_i^0 + RT \log a_i [/tex]
We can write [tex] a_i = \gamma_i x_i [/tex]. My question is why [tex]\gamma_i [/tex] always
tends to some constants (which not depend of temperature and preassure and is
typically equall 1) when [tex]x_i [/tex] tends to 1. Is it possible to prove it without usage of
statistical mechanics apparatus. It means that dillute solution of any substance is always almost ideal.
[tex] \mu_i = \mu_i^0 + RT \log x_i [/tex]
(where [tex] \mu_i^0 [/tex] is a chemical potential of pure substance i and
[tex] x_i[/tex] is mole fraction of i)
In nonideal solution [tex] x_i [/tex] has to be exchanged with activity coefficient [tex]a_i [/tex]:
[tex] \mu_i = \mu_i^0 + RT \log a_i [/tex]
We can write [tex] a_i = \gamma_i x_i [/tex]. My question is why [tex]\gamma_i [/tex] always
tends to some constants (which not depend of temperature and preassure and is
typically equall 1) when [tex]x_i [/tex] tends to 1. Is it possible to prove it without usage of
statistical mechanics apparatus. It means that dillute solution of any substance is always almost ideal.