This article presents a critical analysis of the frequent practice of using the Arrhenius equation for mathematical modeling of very many physical and chemical rate processes. This approach may also be used to characterize the controls and mechanisms of the rate processes investigated. We also discuss  the  specific  form  of  the Arrhenius-type  equation  as  a  relationship  meriting  detailed investigations. In our opinion, the use of the Arrhenius relationship often can only approximate to the behavior of such systems, exemplified by the systems discussed below, including the work of N N Semenov, A K Galwey, A G Mershanov, etc. We draw attention to “erroneous” experimental designs, including the so-called “global kinetic mechanism” and other widespread uses of theoretical models which do not necessarily represent the real situation. Such limitations in rate data analyses impact negatively throughout this branch of science. Here we attempt to question these accepted practices realistically and find answers to the types of studies under consideration that do not include the misconceptions often contained (concealed) therein. Unfortunately, besides the scientific component, various  political and social  applications  often  interfere  in  the  process  by  introducing  errors. This symbiosis of delusions is considered for the example of “solid flame”, a Russian theme that may not be familiar to English-speaking readers. The consequences of repression for scientists in connection with their position on scientific issues are described.

Read full article:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.