In this Reply we show that contrary to the statements of Goldstein, the empirical function we proposed [D. Prevosto, M. Lucchesi, S. Capaccioli, R. Casalini, and P. A. Rolla, Phys. Rev. B 67, 174202 (2003)] for the pressure and temperature dependencies of the configurational entropy is mathematically and physically valid. Specifically we demonstrate that the condition of equal second derivatives, necessary for the configurational entropy to be a function of state, has physically reasonable solutions without the necessity of imposing implausible constraints.
Reply to "Comment on 'Correlation between configurational entropy and structural relaxation time in glass-forming liquids' "
CAPACCIOLI, SIMONE;LUCCHESI, MAURO;ROLLA, PIERANGELO;
2005-01-01
Abstract
In this Reply we show that contrary to the statements of Goldstein, the empirical function we proposed [D. Prevosto, M. Lucchesi, S. Capaccioli, R. Casalini, and P. A. Rolla, Phys. Rev. B 67, 174202 (2003)] for the pressure and temperature dependencies of the configurational entropy is mathematically and physically valid. Specifically we demonstrate that the condition of equal second derivatives, necessary for the configurational entropy to be a function of state, has physically reasonable solutions without the necessity of imposing implausible constraints.File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.