Fick's Law of Diffusion vs. Poiseuille's Law
In the mid-1800's, Fick introduced two differential equations that quantified the above statement for the case of transport through thin membranes. Fick's First Law states that the flux, J, of a component of concentration, C, across a membrane of unit area, in a predefined plane, is proportional to the concentration differential across that plane. Fick's Second Law states that the rate of change of concentration in a volume element of a membrane, within the diffusional field, is proportional to the rate of change of concentration gradient at that point in the field.
Poiseuille's law is the physical law concerning the voluminal laminar stationary flow Φ of an incompressible uniform viscous liquid (so called Newtonian fluid) through a cylindrical tube with constant
circular cross-section. Poiseuille's law is also sometimes called the Hagen-Poiseuille law including reference to Gotthilf Heinrich Ludwig Hagen (1797-1884) for his experiments in 1839.
Despite the relevence of the laws in the cage the past few weeks, I would like to assure you that the parings were completely random. Assuming that Excel's random number generator was not biased, which looking back may not have been such a good assumption. Good thing this ain't for a grade.
7 comments:
Again, not an easy task to sort out the winner. But Fick it is; and not just because he has more vowels in his name... Well, he wins anyway beanholio. Let me tell you why.
First, Fick has two laws, where Poiselle has but one.
Second, Fick was German, Poiselle was French, this point should seal the deal all by itself, but I have more.
Third, Fick's laws are passive diffusion, Poiselle requires a pressure gradient to work; this might actually work to Poiselle's favor.
Forth, Poiselle shares his law in some circles with Hagen, whereas diffusion which does not follow Fick's Laws is referred to as "non-Fickian." Fick gets kudos even where he did nothing, there may be something to this passive thing.
Fick for the win.
I'll have to go with Fick, as I'm so much more a fan of applied science than theoretic science.
Any man able to get his name on something that requires the path of least resistance is certainly noteworthy.
BadAnswer - you might note that passive diffusion still works along a gradient. Arguably, the concentration gradient creates a form of pressure, though not in terms of Newtons, selective, or peer.
Also, non-Fickian diffusion would be cool, but referring to the process of passive diffusion as "Fick'n" lends so much more awesomeness.
StrongBad might say, "Fick'n awesome."
Besides, I wouldn't want to touch anything having to do with "Newtonian fluid".
That guy's been dead for a long time - all he's liable to have on him now is fluid of the embalming variety, and that don't sound too enticing.
Since I seem to have drawn more than a few negative comments aimed at my vowel-focused voting methodology, I have determined to base my votes strictly upon the RAD-ness (RAD-ness?) of combatants involved in future matchups.
After a rather lengthy period of searching and researching, I have found that Fick has a measurement of 1.08 RAD's, which in the science community is pretty rare. It is similar to finding a highschool football player with a GPA of 3.8.
Poiseuille's Law, on the other hand, rates only .35 RAD's-paltry in comparison. This is mainly due to the fact, as badanswer points out, that Poiseuille is French. Additionally, his law is only half his; Gotthilf Heinrich Ludwig
Hagen obviously deserves some of the credit for the law, thus reducing Poiseuille's take of RAD's by half (.175 RAD).
As can clearly be seen, Fick is the winner in this match.
beanholio, there are several flaws in your reasoning. First, I would like to point out that removing half of Poiselles score based on sharing the law is an over simplification. It works only if all of Poiselles Radness is due to his law, which is unlikely. For example, he is dead, which is kind of cool, and worth at least 0.039 on the RAD scale. However, he was french, which would lead to a negative score, if he had not had his law. So, he probably was sitting at about a negative -.65, then he was bumped up by his law. Removing half his law would leave him at -0.15.
Also, I do not believe that the rad scale follows a Gaussian distribution, but rather a Weibull distribution (lambda = 1, k = 3-ish), leaving Fick just above average (still rare for a scientist). For comparison, I rank a 3. Clearly I was not captain of the football team, but still in the top quartile.
Of course, this distribution does not allow for negative numbers, so I have no idea what frenchy did above.
Badanswer,
Although I do appreciate the effort, I get to make up the rules to the rating system that I...made up. RAD's are a unit measuring "Coolness" based upon how much other "Cool" people talk and/or mention them, not necessarily how well it is understood. RAD's follow a distribution similar to how horsepower is rated in engines.
Since Poiselle is rarely mentioned seperately from his law, I did not feel it necessary to measure the "Coolness" of him personally against the work that he did, therefore, he is his work (most especially because he is dead and won't be doing much other than dissembling into his base elements).
Fick still wins and is only slightly cooler than 1 RAD.
I see the source of our confusion now. I was basing my comments off the RAD Scale as created by one "Richelle Dafoe" as defined on Jan. 12, 2004. This definition can be found on UrbanDictionary.com, convienently under the entry "RAD Scale."
Perhaps you should rename your scale to avoid confusion. Unless you have documented proof yours was first, in which case I would sue. And you can always trust unsolicited advice in blog comments.
Post a Comment