Dual critical points and related phenomena in simple fluids from the perspective of (approximate) renormalization theory

International Journal of Thermophysics

Volumn 25, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 1005-1024

  White, J A ^a   Tewari, K P ^a  

^a AMERICAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Critical point; Gas liquid coexistence curve; Global renormalization; Liquid liquid phase transition; Square well with repulsive shoulder

Indexed keywords

CRITICAL POINT; GAS LIQUID COEXISTENCE CURVE; GLOBAL RENORMALIZATION; LIQUID LIQUID PHASE TRANSITION; SQUARE WELL WITH REPULSIVE SHOULDERS;

ANISOTROPY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CRITICAL CURRENT DENSITY (SUPERCONDUCTIVITY); MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MONTE CARLO METHODS; PHASE INTERFACES;

PHASE TRANSITIONS;

EID: 4344681310     PISSN: 0195928X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/B:IJOT.0000038496.95502.3b     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. V. N. Ryzhov and S. M. Stishov, J. Exp. Theor. Phys. 95:710 (2002).
2. H. E. Stanley, M. C. Barbosa, S. Mossa, P. A. Netz, F. Sciortino, F. W. Starr, and M. Yamada, Physica A 315:281 (2002).
3. M. Yamada, S. Mossa, H. E. Stanley, and F. Sciortino, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88:195701 (2002). Other investigators, using different approaches, have arrived at appreciably different estimates for the temperature and pressure at the (conjectured) second critical point; see, for instance, S. B. Kiselev and J. F. Ely, J. Chem. Phys. 116:5657 (2002) and results summarized there of some other alternative approaches.
4. M. Yamada, S. Mossa, H. E. Stanley, and F. Sciortino, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88:195701 (2002). Other investigators, using different approaches, have arrived at appreciably different estimates for the temperature and pressure at the (conjectured) second critical point; see, for instance, S. B. Kiselev and J. F. Ely, J. Chem. Phys. 116:5657 (2002) and results summarized there of some other alternative approaches.
5. G. Franzese, G. Malescio, A. Skibinsky, S. V. Buldyrev, and H. E. Stanley, Nature 409:692 (2001). See also G. Malescio, G. Franzese, G. Pellicane, A. Skibinsky, S. V. Buldyrev, and H. E. Stanley, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 14:2193 (2002).
6. G. Franzese, G. Malescio, A. Skibinsky, S. V. Buldyrev, and H. E. Stanley, Nature 409:692 (2001). See also G. Malescio, G. Franzese, G. Pellicane, A. Skibinsky, S. V. Buldyrev, and H. E. Stanley, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 14:2193 (2002).
7. J. A. White and S. Zhang, Int. J. Thermophys 19:1019 (1998).
8. J. A. White, J. Chem. Phys. 112:3236 (2000).
9. J. A. White, J. Chem. Phys. 113:1580 (2000).
10. J. A. White, Int. J. Thermophys 22:1147 (2001).
11. N. F. Carnahan and K. E. Starling, J. Chem. Phys. 51:635 (1969).
12. G. J. Throop and R. J. Bearman, J. Chem. Phys. 42:2408 (1965).
13. J. A. Barker and D. Henderson, J. Chem. Phys. 47:4714 (1967).
14. c2 the liquid-liquid coexistence curve does not extend quite as far as to the liquid side of the gas-liquid spinodal line.
15. E. W. Lemmon, M. O. McLinden, and D. G. Friend, in Thermophysical Properties of Fluid Systems - NIST WebBook, NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69, P. J. Linstrom and W. G. Mallard eds., National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland, http://webbook.nist.gov (March 2003).
16. K. P. Tewari, Ph.D. Dissertation, American University, Washington, D.C. (in preparation).
17. P. G. Debenedetti and H. E. Stanley, Physics Today 56:40 (2003).
18. The subscripts l and s are (incorrectly) interchanged in Eq. (15) of Ref. 6 and Eq. (3) of Ref. 7, which otherwise are the same as Eq. (5) below, as well as in Eq. (10) in J. A. White, J. Chem. Phys, 111:9352 (1999). This error was first noticed, and corrected, in proof, in Ref. 8. [The error originated when, in 1999, elegant notation introduced by L. Lue and J. M. Prausnitz in J. Chem. Phys. 108:5529 (1998) was adopted without sufficient care, and, regrettably, also without acknowledging the source. I regret these mistakes and wish to apologize for them here. - J.W.]
19. The subscripts l and s are (incorrectly) interchanged in Eq. (15) of Ref. 6 and Eq. (3) of Ref. 7, which otherwise are the same as Eq. (5) below, as well as in Eq. (10) in J. A. White, J. Chem. Phys, 111:9352 (1999). This error was first noticed, and corrected, in proof, in Ref. 8. [The error originated when, in 1999, elegant notation introduced by L. Lue and J. M. Prausnitz in J. Chem. Phys. 108:5529 (1998) was adopted without sufficient care, and, regrettably, also without acknowledging the source. I regret these mistakes and wish to apologize for them here. - J.W.]