arxiv: v1 [physics.chem-ph] 19 Dec 2018

Transcription

1 arxiv: v [physics.chem-ph] 9 Dec 208 ransition state theory in systems of interacting particles Doriano Brogioli, Fabio La Mantia Universität Bremen, Energiespeicher und Energiewandlersysteme, Bibliothekstraße, Bremen, Germany Abstract Chemical equilibrium is fully characterized at thermodynamic level by the free energy: the equilibrium is written in terms of equality of chemical potentials. Rate of chemical reactions can be calculated for ideal solutions by using mass-action equations, with reaction rate constants related to energy barriers through the transition state theory. he two approaches merge in the case of equilibrium and ideal solutions. Here, we discuss how to extend the transition state theory in the case of non-ideal solutions, i.e. of interacting particles, at equilibrium. We find bounds of the exchange reaction rate. However, we show that the value of the exchange reaction rate cannot be calculated from equilibrium thermodynamic parameters (i.e. from the free energy), i.e. it is possible to find different Hamiltonians giving the same free energy but different exchange reaction rate. Introduction Chemical equilibrium is fully characterized at thermodynamic level: given the free energy (a function of parameters such as temperature, volume, and number of particles), the chemical potentials µ are calculated as derivatives of the free energy, and the equilibrium is expressed in terms of the chemical potentials as: n A µ A +n B µ B + = n C µ C +n D µ D +... () where the numbers n are the stoichiometric coefficients of the reaction []. his expression fully accounts for the possible non-ideal behaviour of the system, i.e. for the presence of interactions between particles. On the other hand, reaction rates R are fully characterized for ideal solutions by mass-action equations: R = kc na A cnb B... (2) where the c are the concentrations and k is the reaction constant []. his kind of equations is based on the approximation that the system is ideally well-mixed; however, the equations are actually robust in most cases, because

2 diffusion and mechanical stirring usually provide enough mixing speed, although some reactions and reaction networks can show pathologic behaviours [2, 3, 4]. he transition state theory [5] (or activated state theory) provides an evaluation of the reaction constant: k = Λe E k, (3) where E is the height of the energy barrier that must be crossed by the reactants to give the products. Summarizing, classical theories have been developed for calculating the concentrations of chemical species at equilibrium, even in the presence of interactions (i.e. non-ideal behavior), and for calculating the reaction rates in ideal solutions, even out of equilibrium. he two calculation schemes nicely merge where the validity ranges overlap, i.e. for for systems that are both at equilibrium and ideal. Starting from the thermodynamic equilibrium condition (Eq. ), in ideal solutions the chemical potentials are µ = µ 0 +k lnc, so that the equilibrium is expressed as: c na A cnb c nc C cnd D where the equilibrium constant K is: B... = (4)...K K = e n A µ0 A n B µ0 B +n C µ0 C +n C µ0 C +... k (5) Conversely, starging from the mass-action equations (Eq. 2), the equilibrium is expressed as the equality of forward and backward reaction rates R f and R b : c na A cnb c nc C cnd B... k f D... = (6) k b where k f and k b are the reaction constants of the forward and backward reactions. We notice that Eqs. 4 and 6 are equal, by identifying K = k f /k b. Difficulties arise when we try to evaluate the reaction rates in non-ideal solutions, i.e. if we want to evaluate the effect of interactions on the reaction rates. In this paper, we focus on this problem, limiting the discussion to the systems at equilibrium. Under equilibrium conditions, the forward and backward reaction rates are the same, and we will call them exchange reaction rate. We will discuss if it is possible to relate the exchange reaction rate to thermodynamic quantities, i.e. quantities that can be calculated from the free energy. he following (misleading) approach is sometimes implicitly used. First Eq. is rigorously rewritten as: a na A anb a nc C and D B... = (7)...K where the activities a are functions of chemical potentials µ. his equation is taking into account the interactions, and is formally similar to Eq. 4, with activities substituting the concentrations. But it is also similar to Eq. 6, where 2

3 the two terms of the fraction represent the forward and the backward reaction rates. his led someone to think that the correct reaction rates can be obtained by substituting concentrations c with activities a in the mass-action equation (Eq. 2). Of course, this approach based on a formal similarity is misleading and the correct evaluation of the reaction rates requires a more deep discussion. he difficulty that we meet trying to calculate the reaction rates is not limited to chemical systems but is general in thermodynamics. hermodynamics gives macroscopic properties that can be calculated from the free energy (here F). In other words, a thermodynamic system is fully defined by the function F, dependent on parameters such as temperature, volume, and number of particles. he underlying theory is the statistical mechanics, fully defined by the Hamiltonian H. hefreeenergyf containslessinformationonthesystemthanh. FromH it ispossibletocalculatef throughanintegral,butagivenf canbeobtainedfrom more than one H. In general, there are some physical quantities that cannot be calculated from F (thermodynamics) but require H (statistical mechanics). hey include flows and dissipations (how fast the system relaxes to equilibrium, analogously to the exchange reaction rate) and fluctuation amplitudes (root mean square displacements from the average). he fluctuation-dissipation theorem connects fluctuations and dissipations, sothat onecan be calculatedfrom the other, but oneofthem must be calculated from statistical mechanics (thus not from F). In this paper, we evaluate the effect of interactions on the exchange rate of chemical reactions at equlibrium, based on an extension of the transition state theory, using a statistical mechanics approach. he resulting expression relates the exchange rate to an average of fluctuations (analogously to fluctuationdissipation theorem, by noticing that the exchange rate can be seen as the dissipation of a fluctuation). We give tight lower and upper bounds of the exchange rate. he fluctuation term is formally connected to the integral used for evaluating the activity coefficient. We finally show that the value of the fluctuation term (and hence of the reaction rate) cannot be calculated from F but requires H. 2 otation wo molecules A and B in a lattice with cells; in general there can be any number of molecules in each cell. he configuration of particles is represented by an array s with two indices: s j is either A or B and represents the type of the particle j, and s P j is the position of the particle j in the lattice, i.e. a natural number between and. We denote s the number of elements of the array, i.e. the total number of particles. he notation s s = A,s P = j, with s =, represents a state s to which an additional th particle A has been added at position j. he notation s s i = B, with i, represents a state s in which the ith molecule is substituted by a molecule B, in the same position. 3

4 he system is specified by giving the Hamiltonian function H(s). his Hamiltonian can be seen as an approximation of a continuous model. Average on canonical ensamble of particles of a variable a: a = Z s, s = a(s)e e H(s) s, s = H(s) k (8) where k is the Boltzmann constant and is tha temperature of the system, and Z is the partition function: Z = k (9) 3 Mathematical formulation In the transition state theory, the forward and backward reaction rates are expressed as: R A B = Λ A e E A k (0) R B A = Λ B e E B k () where E A and E B are the heights of the energy barrier from the side of the state A and B, respectively, and Λ is a linear dependence factor. he difference of energy between states A and B is H(A) H(B) = E A E B. When we consider the possibility of changing the energy of the two states A and B, as a consequence of interactions, we get a change of E A and E B, and we decide to linearly distribute the change of the the energy barrier among the two molecules A and B: R A B R B A = Λ A e E+( α)[h(b) H(A)] k (2) = Λ B e E+α[H(A) H(B)] k (3) where α is a linear distribution factor and E is a fixed energy barrier. In the case of interacting particles, Eqs. 2 and 3 are extended to: E+( α)[h(s s i =B) H(s)] R A B = δ s k i =AΛe (4) i= E+α[H(s s i =A ) H(s)] R B A = δ s k i =BΛe (5) i= where δ condition is if condition is met, 0 otherwise, and the notation s s i = B represents a state s in which the ith molecule is substituted by a molecule B, in the same position, as described in Sect. 2. It is worth noting that the role of A and B in Eqs. 2 and 3 is here played by the sum of the δ terms, which select the particles in state A and B, respectively. It is worth noting that the chosen representation is relatively limited: in principle,itwouldbepossibletoputadifferent E andαforeachconfiguration. 4

5 4 Elaboration of the reaction rate By using the definition of average on canonical ensamble Eq. 8: R A B = Λe E k R B A = Λe E k which leads to: R A B Z Z = Λe E k R B A = Λe E k s, s = i= s, s = i= Z Z ( α)[h(s s i =B ) H(s)] δ s k i =Ae s, s = i= he sums can be redefined as follows: R A B = Λe E k R B A = Λe E k Z Z s, s = s, s = s, s = i= [H(s s δ s i =Be α i =A ) H(s)] k e H(s) k (6) e H(s) k (7) αh(s)+( α)h(s s i =B ) δ s k i =Ae (8) ( α)h(s)+αh(s s i =A ) δ s k i =Be (9) j= j= αh(s s =A,s P =j)+( α)h(s s =j) e k (20) ( α)h(s s =j)+αh(s s =A,s P =j) e k (2) where the notation s s = A,s P = j represents a state s (with particles as specified under the sum symbol) to which an additional th particle A has been added at position j, as described in Sect. 2. From the two equations, it is clear that R A B = R B A, as expected by an equlibrium state. In the following, we will consider the exchange reaction rate R = R A B = R B A. Is is now worth expressing R in terms of canonical average through Eq. 8: =A,s P =j)+( α)h(s s R = Λe E k Z Z j= We rewrite this last equation as: R = Λe E k Z Z e αh(s s j αh(s s =A,s P =j)+( α)h(s s e k k (22) (23) where we defined the average j as: f j j = f j (24) j= 5

6 ow we calculate the ratio between the partition functions which appears in Eq. 23: Z H(s) = k (25) By redefining the sum: Z e Z s, s = Z Z = Z s, s = j= (s s e H =A,s P =j) k (s s +e H =j) k (26) By expressing in terms of canonical average through Eq. 8: Z (s s =A,s P = e H k + Z j= and using the average j : Z Z = j (s s e H =A,s P k + We use this last equation for expressing Eq. 23: R = Λe E k j= (s s e H k (27) j (s s e H k e (s s =A,sP =j)+( α)h(s s =B,sP αh k ( ) s s =A,s e H P =j k j H(s) + j ( ) j s s =B,s e H P =j H(s) k where we approximated with in the subscript of the average. ow we define Γ A and Γ B : (28) (29) (s s =A,s P Γ A (s,j) = e H k (30) (s s Γ B (s,j) = e H k (3) We thus get the following expression of R: Γ A (s,j) α Γ B (s,j) α j R = Λe E k Γ A (s,j) j +Γ B (s,j) j (32) 6

7 5 Interpretation in terms of thermodynamic quantities 5. on reacting particles ow we want to give an interpretation of Eq. 32 in terms of chemical potentials. First, we neglect the fact that the molecules can change between states A and B, so that we can impose a number of molecules A and B independently, and calculate the corresponding Helmholtz free energy: By explicitating Z by means of Eq. 9: F ( A, B ) = k ln By using the Stirling approximation: F ( A, B ) = k ln Z A+ B A! B! A B A! B! F ( A, B ) = k A ln A +k Bln B s, s = e H(s) k k ln A B s, s = e H(s) k A B (33) (34) (35) where the argument of the last logarithm approaches for vanishing interaction Hamiltonian H. ow we calculate the chemical potentials µ A and µ B as discrete differences: At first order in / A and / B : µ A = F ( A +, B ) F ( A, B ) (36) µ B = F ( A, B +) F ( A, B ) (37) µ A = k ln A k ln (s s =A,s s, s = P =j) j= e H k s, s = e H(s) k (38) µ B = k ln B k ln (s s =B,s s, s = P =j) j= e H k s, s = e H(s) k (39) By expressing the sums in terms of canonical averages: µ A = k ln A µ B = k ln B k ln k ln e H (s s =A,s P k j j (s s e H k 7 (40) (4)

8 By expressing in terms of Γ A and Γ B : µ A = k ln A k lnγ A(s,j) j (42) µ B = k ln B k lnγ B (s,j) j (43) We thus identify the absolute activity coefficients λ A and λ B : λ A = λ B = Γ A (s,j) j (44) Γ B (s,j) j (45) 5.2 Reacting particles ow we come back to the actual problem of reacting particles, in which the numbersofmoleculesinstateaandbreachanequilibriumandfluctuatearound it. he numbers A (s) and B (s) are thus functions of the state s, and we can evaluate the average values A (s) and A (s). From classical thermodynamics: λ A A (s) = λ B B (s) (46) and A (s) + B (s) = (47) In the following, we will write A instead of A (s) and B instead of B (s). 5.3 Expression of the reaction rate in terms of absolute activity coefficients ow we express the averages of Eq. 32 in terms of absolute activity coefficients and average numbers of molecules. In particular, we consider the term at the denominator and we express it by means of Eqs. 44 and 45: Γ A (s,j) j +Γ B (s,j) j = λ A + λ B (48) By using Eq. 46: Γ A (s,j) j +Γ B (s,j) j = λ A ( + λ ) A = ( + ) B λ B λ A A (49) By using Eq. 47: Γ A (s,j) j +Γ B (s,j) j = λ A A (50) 8

9 By using again Eq. 46: By using Eqs. 44 and 45: Γ A (s,j) j +Γ B (s,j) j = λ α A α A λ α B α B (5) Γ A (s,j) j +Γ B (s,j) j = ow we put this result in Eq. 32: [Γ A (s,j) j ] α [Γ B (s,j) j ] α α A α B (52) We rewrite this as: Γ A (s,j) α Γ B (s,j) α j R = Λe E k α A α B [ ] α [ ] α (53) Γ A (s,j) j Γ B (s,j) j R = Λe E k α A α B Ξ (54) where the correction factor Ξ is defined as: Γ A (s,j) α Γ B (s,j) α j Ξ = [ Γ A (s,j) j ] α [ Γ B (s,j) j ] α (55) he factor Ξ is in absence of interactions. Moreover, it is also in the extreme cases of α = 0 and α =. In such cases, we recover the classical result valid for ideal solutions. 6 Bound for Ξ From the definition of Ξ, Eq. 55, we get a trivial lower bound Ξ 0. An upper bound is obtained as follows. We write Ξ from Eq. 55 as: Ξ = f [Γ A (s,j),γ B (s,j)] j ] (56) f [Γ A (s,j) j,γ B (s,j) j where: f (x,y) = x α y α. (57) he function f is convex for 0 α (the range of interest in this discussion) in the domain x 0 and y 0. his can be easily seen by representing f in polar coordinates r, ϑ: f (r,ϑ) = rsin(ϑ)cotan(ϑ) α. (58) 9

10 with the domain r > 0, 0 ϑ π/2. It can be noticed that the function factorizes into a linear part in r and a convex function of ϑ. We can thus use the generalization of Jensen s inequality for functions of two variables: f (x,y) f (x,y ). (59) By inserting this inequality in Eq. 56, we find an upper bound for Ξ: Ξ. (60) he bound is tight, since it is reached by ideal solutions (H = 0). 7 Small interactions We define: so that Eqs. 30 and 3 give: δ A (s,j) = H ( s s = A,s P = j ) H (s) (6) δ B (s,j) = H ( s s = B,s P = j ) H (s) (62) Γ A (s,j) = e δ A (s,j) k (63) Γ B (s,j) = e δ B (s,j) k (64) Γ A (s,j) α Γ B (s,j) α = e αδ A (s,j)+( α)δ B (s,j) k (65) We now assume that δ A (s,j) k and δ B (s,j) k; in this limit, we aim at expanding Ξ up to the second order. We first expand: Γ A (s,j) = δ A(s,j) k Γ B (s,j) = δ B (s,j) k + δ A(s,j) 2 2(k) 2 (66) + δ B (s,j) 2 2(k) 2 (67) Γ A (s,j) α Γ B (s,j) α = αδ A(s,j)+( α)δ B (s,j) + k (68) [αδ A (s,j)+( α)δ B (s,j)] 2 2(k) 2 (69) 0

11 By calculating the averages: Γ A (s,j) j = k δ A(s,j) j + 2(k) 2 δ A (s,j) 2 j (70) Γ B (s,j) j = k δ B (s,j) j + Γ A (s,j) α Γ B (s,j) α j We use the second-order expansion: 2(k) 2 δ B (s,j) 2 j (7) = α k δ A(s,j) j α k δ B (s,j) j + (72) α 2 2(k) 2 δ A (s,j) 2 j α( α) (k) 2 + ( α)2 2(k) 2 δ A (s,j)δ B (s,j) j δ B (s,j) 2 j (+x) α = +αx α( α) x 2 (73) 2 we get: [ ] α Γ A (s,j) j = α k δ A(s,j) j α + 2(k) 2 δ A (s,j) 2 j (74) α( α) [ ] 2 2(k) 2 δ A (s,j) j (75) [ ] α Γ B (s,j) j = α k δ B (s,j) j + α 2(k) 2 δ B (s,j) 2 j (76) α( α) [ ] 2 2(k) 2 δ B (s,j) j (77) + and finally: ] α [ ] α [Γ A (s,j) j Γ B (s,j) j = α k δ A(s,j) j α k δ B (s,j) j + α 2(k) 2 δ A (s,j) 2 j + α 2(k) 2 δ B (s,j) 2 j α( α) [ ] 2 2(k) 2 δ A (s,j) j α( α) [ ] 2 2(k) 2 δ B (s,j) j + α( α) (k) 2 δ A (s,j) j δ B (s,j) j (78) By substituting the expressions of Eqs. 72 and 78 into the definition of Ξ, Eq. 55, we get, up to the second order: Ξ = α( α) { 2(k) 2 [δ A (s,j) δ B (s,j)] 2 j ] } 2 [δ A (s,j) δ B (s,j) j (79)

12 8 Examples 8. Excluded volume If any particle excludes the presence of other particles in the same cell (whatever is the species): Γ A (s,j) = Γ B (s,j) is (on allowed configurations s) if the cell j is empty in configuration s, 0 otherwise. We easily find that Ξ =. ow we consider that a molecule B excludes other molecules B, but any number of molecules A can be present in the same cell. Γ A (s,j) = for every configuration: Γ A (s,j) j = (80) Γ B (s,j) is (on allowed configurations s) if the cell j does not contain a B in configuration s, 0 otherwise: Γ B (s,j) j = B For the product we thus find the same result, except for the case α = : (8) We finally find: Γ A (s,j) α Γ B (s,j) α j = B (82) [ ] α B Ξ = (83) 8.2 Mean field interaction Under the approximation of Sect. 7, we take the Hamiltonian: H (s) = h A (s) B (s) (84) representing a system in which each particle interacts equally with all the others (mean field). We calculate δ A and δ B : We get: Ξ = h 2α( α) 2(k) 2 δ A (s,j) = h B (85) δ B (s,j) = h A (86) { [ A (s) B (s)] 2 [ } ] 2 A (s) B (s) By writing A = A +δ, we get B = B δ. his leads to: (87) Ξ = 2h 2α( α) (k) 2 δ (s) 2 (88) 2

13 8.3 Interactions between particles inside a cell Under the approximation of Sect. 7, we consider interactions between particles inside the same cell. We assume that there is an excluded volume effect, preventing more than two particles to enter in a cell; this simplifies the calculations. We define the Hamiltonianasthe sum ofthe contributionsofeachcell H j, which are:. H j = 0 if the jth cell is empty or occupied by a single particle; 2. H j = h AB if the jth cell is occupied by one particle A and one particle B; 3. H j = h AA if the jth cell is occupied by two particles A 4. H j = h BB if the jth cell is occupied by two particles B We calculate Ξ: [ Ξ = α( α) A ] (s) 2(k) 2 (h AA h AB ) 2 B (s) + (h BB h AB ) 2 (89) 9 Relation between Ξ and F In this section, we discuss if it is possible to calculate Ξ from F, i.e. if the reaction rate depends on thermodynamically measurable quantities. here are two alternative possibilities: i) Ξ can be calculated from F, through a (possibly difficult) process, either ii) it is possible to find two Hamiltonians, giving the same F, and different Ξ. We will show that the second option holds, and we will provide examples of couples of Hamiltonians H and H, which give the same F but different Ξ and Ξ. 9. wo excluded-volume Hamiltonians Here we consider two excluded-volume cases, which give the same F but different Ξ. In the case, the presence of a particle B in a cell excludes the presence of any other particle in the same cell, i.e. excludes the presence of another B and of a particle A. In the case 2, the presence of a particle B in a cell excludes the presence of another particle B in the same cell, and the presence of a particle A in a neighboring cell in a specific direction, e.g. if the cell j is occupied by B the particle A is excluded from cell j +. Γ A is when the added particle is not in a forbidden cell; in both cases, the forbidden cells are B. We thus get: Γ A = B (90) 3

14 he same holds for particles B: Γ B = B (9) Γ A Γ B is when it is possible to put either a particle A or B in the same position j. In case, Γ A = Γ B, and it is when the cell j is not occupied, hence in B cases: Γ A Γ B = B (92) We thus find Ξ=. In case 2, Γ A Γ B is when both the cell j and the cell j + are not occupied by particles B. In the limit of : We finally get: Γ A Γ B = Ξ = B ( B ) 2 (93) (94) We thus see that the two cases and 2 lead to the same F (same λ) but different Ξ. 9.2 Small interactions In Sect. 8.3 We rewrite here the Eq. 89: [ Ξ = α( α) A ] (s) 2(k) 2 (h AA h AB ) 2 B (s) + (h BB h AB ) 2 (95) It is interesting to compare this expression to the approximated expressions of λ, obtained through Eqs. 44 and 45 with the approximations Eqs. 70 and 7: A (s) h AA λ A = + k + B (s) h AB (96) k B (s) h BB λ B = + k + A (s) h AB (97) k he absolute activity coefficients λ and Ξ depend on the interaction parameters h, however, it is easy to notice that the dependence is different. Depending on the sign of the h, λ becomes more or less than, while Ξ can only become less than. An increase of λ can be associated to an increase of Ξ or to a decrease of Ξ, depending on the values of the h. 4

15 Given the values of the parameters h AA, h AB and h BB, it is possible to obtain an alternative set h AA, h AB and h BB as follows: h AB = h AB +δh (98) h AA = h AA B (s) A (s) δh (99) h BB = h BB A(s) B (s) δh (00) his transformation leaves the λ unaltered, and thus does not affect F, but changes Ξ. References [] Peter Atkins, Julio de Paula, and James Keeler. Atkins Physical Chemistry. Oxford university press, Oxford, 204. [2] D. oussaint. Particleantiparticle annihilation in diffusive motion. J. Chem. Phys., 78:2642, 983. [3] K. Kang and S. Redner. Scaling approach for the kinetics of recombination processes. Phys. Rev. Lett., 52:955, 984. [4] D. Brogioli. Violation of the mass-action law in dilute chemical systems. J. Chem. Phys., 39:8402, 203. [5] D. G. ruhlar, B. C. Garrett, and S. J. Klippenstein. Current status of transition-state theory. J. Phys. Chem., 00(3): ,