MathGroup Archive 2008

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: From reactions to differential equations

On nov. 9, 11:26, "Scot T. Martin" <smar... at> wrote:
> This link might also be helpful:
> On Sat, 8 Nov 2008, Alexei Boulbitch wrote:
> > Hi, Istvan,
> > just to add few words to the previous reply. I learned recently from th=
e =
> reply of M.Roellig that using Mathematica you can transform chemical equa=
> ons into differential. This makes sense, if you deal with many tens or ev=
>  hundreds of reactions. I rule out the evident problem related to stabi=
>  of such a huge system. If one goes this way, he probably have successf=
>  solved it.
> > However, if I understand you right, you asked another question: your pr=
> lem is just to translate a certain (not too large) system of chemical rea=
> ions into differential equations and to analyze them. Right?
> > OK, but in this case it is an easy task, provided chemical reactions (l=
> e 2 Subscript[H, 2] + Subscript[O, 2] -> 2 Subscript[H, 2] O) are already=
> stablished.
> > "...I would like to understand the method how these reactions are actua=
> y converted to diff.equations..."
> > I believe that your problem is not in Mathematica or any other program.=
>  doubt that by use of any program one can understand such things. In co=
> st, the rules of translation a chemical reaction into a kinetic equation =
> e explained in a number of books. Just in case you missed a good one, hav=
e =
> a look into
> > Segel, L. A. Biological kinetics (eds. Cannings, C., Hoppenstedt, F. C.=
>  Segel, L. A.) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991).
> > I myself learned it first from one of Prigogine=B4s books, such as
> > Prigogine, Ilya (1961). Thermodynamics of Irreversible Processes, 2nd E=
>  New York: Interscience  or> Prigogine, Ilya; Nicolis, G. (1977). Sel=
f-Organization in Non-Equilibrium=
>  Systems. Wiley. ISBN 0471024015.
> > There is of coarse, also a lot of other books on this subject. You need=
> o read only few introductory chapters.
> > Even more, I would never trust any program to translate instead of me c=
> mical reactions into differential equations. All the physical sense (chem=
> al sense, biological sense - cross out those unnecessary) is hidden exact=
>  in this step. It is here that you make assumptions and formulate your =
> l. All the rest is some mathematical analysis which will never give you m=
> e than you put into your equations during this step.
> > I successfully used Mathematica several times to analyze equations desc=
> bing chemical kinetics. However, if you have more than two-three non-line=
>  equations describing your system, Mathematica may be not the best choi=
ce. =
> I have seen at least one other than Mathematica program which was better =
> signed for this purpose.  But moderator informed me that it is not elig=
>  to give here its name.
> > Finally, I let myself one philosophic comment to the Community. In the =
> thGroup I often see questions which originated when the author cannot do =
> mething using Mathematica, but are in fact related to some lack of knowle=
> e of the author in Mathematics or in some other discipline. So literally =
> e answer does not belong to this forum. My attitude is that we should ans=
> r these questions nevertheless and give hints of where to look for the an=
> er. Itself the fact that some question is related to some other field (ra=
> er than Mathematica) is something to do with Mathematica nevertheless. Ju=
>  due to indication of boundaries.
> > Success, Alexei
> >> Hi Istvan,
> >> the reaction kinetic equations only tell you what is changed into what=

  • Prev by Date: Re: Garbage collection for objects?
  • Next by Date: Re: From reactions to differential equations
  • Previous by thread: Re: Re: From reactions to differential equations
  • Next by thread: Re: From reactions to differential equations