|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Maybe I'm misinterpreting the text in the article due to the fact that English isn't my native language, but aren't most chemical reaction irreversible? No most chemical reactions are in fact reversible, and technically I believe all are. This is coming from text books, to which I cant link that I use for my advanced higher chemistry class in school. Most people have this misconception as the reverse reaction is very slow under the conditions used for the foward reaction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 16:11, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
But to see if I get the principal of dynamic equilibrium:
Our body takes oxygen from our blood, but our lungs refill our blood with fresh oxygen. So this is an example of dynamic equilibrium within 'our' system?
- If you apply enough energy to the products of chemical reactions you can break them apart and form the reactants, so chemical reactions are reversible. The example above isn't really dynamic equilibrium because there is no point of equilibrium. Our body uses the oxygen, the O2 that has been used doesn't return to the blood or the lungs. In dynamic equilibrium a reaction is producing the products and reactants at the same rate. Ex: water vapor is producing liquid water at the same rate that liquid water produces vapor. The concentrations of both the reactants and products stay the same at equilibrium. (Cabin Tom 13:57, 29 January 2006 (U.T.C))
I don't think that closed system boundary conditions need apply for a dynamic equilibrium to exist. For example, in my line of work, ecological modeling, we often have systems in which state variables remain constant, while material (and energy for that matter) enters and leaves the model. All that matters (as I understand things) is that state variables are constant (or constrained within some periodic or quasi-periodic orbit) but remain there as a function of balancing processes. Comments? --Plumbago 08:08, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- In terms of a chemical reaction (the main focus of this article) in order to achieve dynamic equilibrium the reaction must be in a closed system. Referring to the bucket of water example given, if the bucket was not kept in a closed (perfectly sealed) room then the water vapour would be able to float out the door and into the world which wouldn't strictly be a closed system as the water vapour would be acted on by other forces (the sun, wind and the such). So in an open system the water vapour would float off and would not have such a large rate of condensing back into the water. So yes in order to achieve dynamic equilibrium in a chemical reaction it must take place in a closed system. Lastsal 09:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure how to see who wrote this but their interpretation of dynamic equilibrium using the bucket of water model helped a lot. This is something I've never really thought of and that example helped. Thanks.
Should static equilibrium really redirect to Mechanical equilibrium ... is there any such thing as static equilibrium outside of mechanics?
- Yes, it's used in economics. -- Beland 03:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
This article doesn't really cover the economic concept of dynamic equilibrium in enough detail. -- Beland 03:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 09:48, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Make this more general?
Dynamic equilibrium is a concept which applies to a wide range of topics, from philosophy (Heraclitus's 'eris dike') to chemistry to control theory. Should this be an article just for the technical chemistry term rather than the more general dynamical systems concept? ChE Fundamentalist (talk) 04:16, 6 September 2011 (UTC)