pith. sign in

arxiv: 1703.08719 · v2 · pith:56WYSMN5new · submitted 2017-03-25 · ❄️ cond-mat.soft · cond-mat.mes-hall· physics.ao-ph· physics.atm-clus· physics.chem-ph

Reexamination of Tolman's law and the Gibbs adsorption equation for curved interfaces

classification ❄️ cond-mat.soft cond-mat.mes-hallphysics.ao-phphysics.atm-clusphysics.chem-ph
keywords gammamanuscripttolmanadsorptionanonymousargumentarxivcalled
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

In manuscript arXiv:1703.08719 [cond-mat.soft], it was claimed that the well-known deduction of Tolman's law is not rigorous, since Tolman's argument implies that two different definitions of the surface tension, called $\gamma$ and $\bar\gamma$ in the manuscript, coincide. This claim is retracted as it can be shown by free-energy minimization that $\gamma = \bar\gamma$ indeed holds for the Laplace radius. Joachim Gro\ss, Philipp Rehner, Carlos Vega, \O{}ivind Wilhelmsen, and the anonymous reviewers of The Journal of Chemical Physics contributed to finding the mistake in the manuscript.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.