On the probability of violations of Fourier's law for heat flow in small systems observed for short times

Journal of Chemical Physics

Volumn 132, Issue 2, 2010, Pages

  Evans, Denis J ^a   Searles, Debra J ^b   Williams, Stephen R ^a  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DISSIPATION FUNCTIONS; ENTROPY PRODUCTION; FINITE TIME; FIRST-PRINCIPLES; FOURIER'S LAW; HEAT FLOWS; MANY-BODY SYSTEMS; NON-EQUILIBRIUM STEADY STATE; NONEQUILIBRIUM MOLECULAR DYNAMICS SIMULATION; SMALL SYSTEMS; THERMAL CONDUCTION; THERMAL RESERVOIR; TIME-AVERAGED; TRANSIENT FLUCTUATIONS; TRANSIENT TIME;

FLOW MEASURING INSTRUMENTS; HEAT TRANSFER; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; PROBABILITY; PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION; STATISTICAL MECHANICS;

HEAT FLUX;

ARTICLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HEAT; PROBABILITY; THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY; THERMODYNAMICS;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; HOT TEMPERATURE; PROBABILITY; THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY; THERMODYNAMICS;

EID: 74549149509     PISSN: 00219606     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.3279124     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. If the force acts to change the equilibrium state of the system, the dissipative flux is calculated as the difference is the total flux from the equilibrium value at the instantaneous value of the force. The dissipative flux could thus be termed the "purely dissipative flux." For example, the dissipative flux for a shearing fluid is given by the viscous pressure tensor, not the total pressure tensor that contains the diagonal contributions of the equilibrium hydrostatic pressure.
2. D. J. Evans, E. G. D. Cohen, and G. P. Morriss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 0031-9007 71, 2401 (1993). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.71.2401
3. D. J. Evans and D. J. Searles, Phys. Rev. E 1063-651X 50, 1645 (1994) 10.1103/PhysRevE.50.1645;
4. D. J. Evans and D. J. Searles, Phys. Rev. E 1063-651X 52, 5839 (1995) 10.1103/PhysRevE.52.5839;
5. D. J. Evans and D. J. Searles, Phys. Rev. E 1063-651X 53, 5808 (1996) 10.1103/PhysRevE.53.5808;
6. D. J. Searles and D. J. Evans, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 112, 9727 (2000) 10.1063/1.481610; (Pubitemid 30886648)
7. E. M. Sevick, R. Prabhakar, S. R. Williams, and D. J. Searles, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 0066-426X 59, 603 (2008). 10.1146/annurev.physchem.58.032806.104555 (Pubitemid 351703399)
8. D. J. Searles and D. J. Evans, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 113, 3503 (2000). 10.1063/1.1287424 (Pubitemid 30936929)
9. G. Gallavotti and E. G. D. Cohen, J. Stat. Phys. 0022-4715 80, 931 (1995) 10.1007/BF02179860;
10. G. Gallavotti and E. G. D. Cohen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 0031-9007 74, 2694 (1995). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.2694
11. J. L. Lebowitz and H. Spohn, J. Stat. Phys. 0022-4715 95, 333 (1999) 10.1023/A:1004589714161;
12. C. Maes, J. Stat. Phys. 0022-4715 95, 367 (1999) 10.1023/A:1004541830999;
13. J. Kurchan, J. Phys. A 0305-4470 31, 3719 (1998) 10.1088/0305-4470/31/16/ 003; (Pubitemid 128059972)
14. F. Bonetto, G. Gallavotti, and P. L. Garrido, Physica D 0167-2789 105, 226 (1997) 10.1016/S0167-2789(97)00007-9;
15. F. Bonetto, N. I. Chernov, and J. L. Lebowitz, Chaos 1054-1500 8, 823 (1998). 10.1063/1.166369
16. D. J. Evans and G. P. Morriss, Statistical Mechanics of Nonequilibrium Fluids, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008).
17. D. J. Searles and D. J. Evans, Int. J. Thermophys. 0195-928X 22, 123 (2001). 10.1023/A:1006759703505 (Pubitemid 33635817)
18. D. J. Evans and D. J. Searles, Adv. Phys. 0001-8732 51, 1529 (2002). 10.1080/00018730210155133 (Pubitemid 35458027)
19. D. J. Searles and D. J. Evans, Aust. J. Chem. 0004-9425 57, 1119 (2004). 10.1071/CH04115 (Pubitemid 40026695)
20. R. Klages, Microscopic Chaos, Fractals and Transport in Nonequilibrium Statistical Mechanics (World Scientific, Singapore, 2007)
21. A. J. Lichtenberg and M. A. Lieberman, Regular and Chaotic Dynamics, 2nd ed. (Springer, New York, 1992).
22. J. Petravic and P. Harrowell, Phys. Rev. E 1063-651X 71, 061201 (2005) 10.1103/PhysRevE.71.061201;
23. J. Petravic and P. Harrowell, Phys. Rev. E 1063-651X 74, 049903 (E) (2006). 10.1103/PhysRevE.74.049903 (Pubitemid 44536618)
24. C. Mejía-Monasterio and L. Rondoni, J. Stat. Phys. 0022-4715 133, 617 (2008). 10.1007/s10955-008-9618-8
25. D. J. Evans, D. J. Searles, and S. R. Williams, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp. 2009, P07029. 10.1088/1742-5468/2009/07/P07029 1742-5468
26. D. J. Searles, L. Rondoni, and D. J. Evans, J. Stat. Phys. 0022-4715 128, 1337 (2007). 10.1007/s10955-007-9372-3
27. D. J. Evans, D. J. Searles, and S. R. Williams, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 128, 014504 (2008). 10.1063/1.2812241
28. S. Lepri, R. Livi, and A. Politi, Physica D 0167-2789 119, 140 (1998). 10.1016/S0167-2789(98)00076-1
29. M. M. Sano, Phys. Rev. E 1063-651X 61, 1144 (2000). 10.1103/PhysRevE.61. 1144
30. x (-L/2,t)] /L }. The neglect of higher order terms is justified in the weak gradient limit.
31. S. R. Williams, D. J. Searles, and D. J. Evans, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 124, 194102 (2006). 10.1063/1.2196411 (Pubitemid 43781998)
32. D. J. Evans, D. J. Searles, and L. Rondoni, Phys. Rev. E 1063-651X 71, 056120 (2005). 10.1103/PhysRevE.71.056120 (Pubitemid 41481008)
33. Sano (Ref.) concludes that the slope agrees with the theoretical prediction, although the data presented in Fig. 10 in Ref. indicate that the slope is underestimated by at least 16%.
34. The test of the so-called ESI by Sano (Ref.) is not valid since the so-called ESI is not expected to be valid for this particular ensemble and dynamics (see Ref.). His suggestions that the reason the tests failed was because either the system has not reached a steady state or there is a spurious boundary or size effect are unreasonable since the correct form of the TFT does not require a steady state, can account for boundary effects, and does not require the thermodynamic limit to be taken. TFT is valid at all times after the application of the field so long simulation times are not required as suggested by Sano.