More on Arrhenius plots

Axel Lorke’s Quick Study in the May 2021 issue of Physics Today (page 66) describes Svante Arrhenius’s illustrious career and provides important insight into Arrhenius’s quantitative description of thermally induced processes. Lorke describes the broad power of the famous Arrhenius relationship a=Aexp(−Ea/kBT), where kB is the Boltzmann constant and T is absolute temperature, to capture complex physics with temperature-dependent measurements aimed at the extraction of a single parameter, the activation energy Ea. Presenting an example from thermodynamics and another from kinetics, he shows how Ea connects closely to independently determined quantities such as a semiconductor’s bandgap energy and the UV-induced gelation energy of proteins.The Quick Study focuses on the slope of logarithmic plots of rates and other temperature-dependent quantities versus inverse temperature 1/T. In kinetics, the prefactor A of the exponential also provides important physical information. It may be obtained by extrapolating an Arrhenius line like that of figure 3 in Lorke’s Quick Study to yield an intercept at the 1/kBT=0 axis. If the quantity measured is the frequency of a process, as is often the case in solid-state physics, the prefactor A can be called the attempt frequency, with A−1 being the limiting time required to surmount the activation barrier as the temperature approaches infinity. In textbook examples, for small Ea, this approach yields plausible values for such frequencies. Further, if the Ea of such a process is modified only slightly, the intercept does not change.Starting with reports by Frederick Hurn Constable11. F. H. Constable, Proc. R. Soc. London A 108, 355 (1925). https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1925.0081 in 1925 and by Wilfried Meyer and Hans Neldel22. W. Meyer, H. Neldel, Phys. Z. 38, 1014 (1937). in 1937, researchers have done a great number of experiments on sets of closely related materials and systems in which the prefactor of Arrhenius plots of a related set varies systematically with Ea. While care must be taken to avoid artifacts, it has been clear for some time that the phenomenon is real.33. W. Linert, Collect. Czech. Chem. Commun. 55, 21 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1135/cccc19900021 For a wide-ranging variety of sets of related physical, geological, biological, and chemical phenomena, the logarithms of those intercepts vary linearly with Ea. That also means the Arrhenius fit lines cross at an isokinetic temperature at which the rate is independent of Ea. Those observations have various names: the isokinetic rule, the compensation law (because the increase in the prefactor partially compensates for the increase in Ea), and the Meyer–Neldel rule.The meaning and explanation of the Meyer–Neldel rule were long considered to be a mystery, but work by a number of groups in the final decades of the past millennium provided a clear theoretical framework for both kinetic and equilibrium systems. The key to activation is not the energy or enthalpy; it is the free-energy change, which includes an entropy term. When the activation barrier is large, the entropy change increases with Ea, and that increases A.In 2006 one of us (Yelon) coauthored a review of the state of the art in experiment and theory,44. A. Yelon, B. Movaghar, R. S. Crandall, Rep. Prog. Phys. 69, 1145 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/69/4/R04 which have continued to evolve since. Systematic studies yield information concerning the characteristic energy of the collective excitations—phonons or local vibrations—that are aggregated to surmount the activation barrier.55. A. Yelon, B. Movaghar, H. M. Branz, Phys. Rev. B 46, 12244 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.46.12244 In some cases, notably studies of electronic or ionic conductivity, important information concerning mechanisms can be obtained. Like the Arrhenius relation that spawned it, the Meyer–Neldel rule is an elegant way to gain insight into the fundamental interactions governing temperature-dependent processes.ReferencesSection:ChooseTop of pageReferences <<1. F. H. Constable, Proc. R. Soc. London A 108, 355 (1925). https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1925.0081, Google ScholarCrossref2. W. Meyer, H. Neldel, Phys. Z. 38, 1014 (1937). Google Scholar3. W. Linert, Collect. Czech. Chem. Commun. 55, 21 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1135/cccc19900021, Google ScholarCrossref4. A. Yelon, B. Movaghar, R. S. Crandall, Rep. Prog. Phys. 69, 1145 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/69/4/R04, Google ScholarCrossref, ISI5. A. Yelon, B. Movaghar, H. M. Branz, Phys. Rev. B 46, 12244 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.46.12244, Google ScholarCrossref, ISI© 2021 American Institute of Physics.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.