MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399534027 · doi:10.1103/physreve.109.065104

Molecular dynamics study of the sonic horizon of microscopic Laval nozzles

2024· article· en· W4399534027 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Helmut Ortmayer, Robert E. Zillich

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. E · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonatomic gasNozzleSupersonic speedMechanicsPhysicsSpeed of soundKnudsen numberMach numberClassical mechanicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Laval nozzle can accelerate expanding gas above supersonic velocities, while cooling the gas in the process. This work investigates this process for microscopic Laval nozzles by means of nonequilibrium molecular dynamics simulations of stationary flow, using grand-canonical Monte Carlo particle reservoirs. We study the steady-state expansion of a simple fluid, a monoatomic gas interacting via a Lennard-Jones potential, through an idealized nozzle with atomically smooth walls. We obtain the thermodynamic state variables pressure, density, and temperature but also the Knudsen number, speed of sound, velocity, and the corresponding Mach number of the expanding gas for nozzles of different sizes. We find that the temperature is well defined in the sense that the each velocity components of the particles obey the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution, but it is anisotropic, especially for small nozzles. The velocity autocorrelation function reveals a tendency towards condensation of the cooled supersonic gas, although the nozzles are too small for the formation of clusters. Overall we find that microscopic nozzles act qualitatively like macroscopic nozzles in that the particles are accelerated to supersonic speeds while their thermal motion relative to the stationary flow is cooled. We find that, like macroscopic Laval nozzles, microscopic nozzles also exhibit a sonic horizon, which is well defined on a microscopic scale. The sonic horizon is positioned only slightly further downstream compared to isentropic expansion through macroscopic nozzles, where it is situated in the most narrow part. We analyze the sonic horizon by studying space-time density correlations, i.e., how thermal fluctuations at two positions of the gas density are correlated in time and find that after the sonic horizon there are indeed no upstream correlations on a microscopic scale.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. ESame topicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical MechanicsFrench-language works237,207