-
5
-
-
0343484669
-
-
We note the following errata: [formula omitted] should be replaced by [formula omitted]in Eq. (45) and twice in Eq. (42), and (−16) should be replaced by 8 in Eq. (45)
-
(1981)
J. Chem. Phys
, vol.74
, pp. 4130
-
-
Rainwater, J.C.1
-
20
-
-
85034726986
-
-
By a “realistic potential” we mean a potential with a large (not necessarily infinite) repulsive core, an attractive well, and a tail which approaches zero as [formula omitted] from below faster than [formula omitted] We also consider only smooth and continuous potentials. Examples are the m-6-8 (Ref. 19) and Hulburt-Hirschfelder (Ref. 20) potential families
-
-
-
-
27
-
-
85034728724
-
-
In Ref. 23 the collisional transfer contributions plus the three-monomer contributions are taken to be [formula omitted] and [formula omitted] which contrasts with the usual modified Enskog theory, Ref. 25, in which, [formula omitted] [formula omitted] where C is the third virial coefficient. The respective expressions coincide only for the hard sphere potential
-
-
-
-
30
-
-
85034722684
-
-
See the discussion following Eq. (46) of Ref. 12
-
-
-
-
31
-
-
0347121248
-
-
Note that this work uses a monomer-dimer to monomer-monomer effective diameter ratio of 1.16, a result justified but not actually used in Ref. 23
-
(1979)
High Temp. Res
, vol.16
, pp. 1005
-
-
Kuznetsov, V.M.1
-
42
-
-
84951357380
-
-
Equations (12) and (16) hold for realistic as well as repulsive potentials. In the former case the trace is taken over both the discrete bound states and the continuum of scattering states
-
-
-
-
45
-
-
84951357381
-
-
Our definition of θ follows Refs. 9-15. Acute θ corresponds to an incoming trajectory point and obtuse 0 to an outgoing trajectory point
-
-
-
-
49
-
-
85034729902
-
-
We prefer to use p instead of γ because, if γ is used, the boundary between free and metastable phase space becomes (formally) temperature dependent, and temperature differentiation is then much more difficult
-
-
-
-
50
-
-
85034725335
-
-
Since [formula omitted] approaches zero as b approaches the orbiting impact parameter [formula omitted] from above, the transformation [formula omitted] helps suppress certain singularities associated with orbiting. See. Ref. 42, Appendix E
-
-
-
-
54
-
-
85034728083
-
-
According to kinetic theory for a gas of hard spheres, the leading terms omitted in Eqs. (58) and (59) are of order [formula omitted] In ρ (see Ref. 49). Such terms are usually presumed to be present for smooth repulsive or realistic potentials also. Experimental evidence for their existence is not conclusive (see Ref. 50)
-
-
-
-
59
-
-
85034725819
-
-
See Sec. II 2 of Ref. 7. We omit the infinity subscript
-
-
-
-
62
-
-
85034724762
-
-
We follow the distinction between accuracy and precision of Ref. 53, Sec. 4
-
-
-
-
69
-
-
84951357374
-
-
From the classical viewpoint it is natural to associate metastable with bound, whereas from the quantum viewpoint it is natural to associate metastable with free. A quantum kinetic theory with well-defined bound projection operators can be developed, but there is likely to be no explicit inclusion of metastable states. Since the arguments in Ref. 2, Sec. IV are convincing that metastable tunneling times are typically much longer than times between collisions, a quantum treatment could give misleading results without extreme care. Also (Refs. 31 and 33), for certain potentials various moments of the equilibrium quantum velocity distributions diverge, and this is likely to cause severe complications for kinetic theory
-
-
-
|
