Abstract:  We are going to introduce the concept of “kinematic numbers” and their application to the probability function. We shall then see how this may help explain both the latent heat of vaporization, and the critical temperature. Moreover, our intuitive approach allows us to understand both phenomena based upon kinetic theory, and the Boltzmann factor. We shall also discuss the limitations of Avogadro’s hypothesis, and show a unique interpretation for the Clausius-Clapeyron equation.

 

Conclusions: The theory given herein, allows us to explain both the latent heat of vaporization, and the critical temperature. It is based upon the simple consideration of what happens if vaporization requires all of the neighboring liquid molecules colliding with the vaporizing molecule, at some instant of time. The explanation does not require surface energy based arguments, which become cumbersome. We deduced that for the vaporization of noble liquid molecules occurs when we have a total energy of: 9kTb, hence we called “9” the kinematic number for vaporization. And a plausible unique path was given which explains the number 9. Certainly, this explains both, the latent heat of vaporization, and why molecules from below the tensile layer are the ones, which tend to vaporize in simple terms. Finally, our new probability, allowed us to calculate an equation, which was similar to the Clausius-Clapeyron equation. Extrapolating the same path dependent logic allowed us to explain why no tensile layer can exist at the critical temperature (Tc). This is based upon a surface molecule, only having five neighbors, and each of those neighbors having a mean accessible energy of: , which led to noble substances having the kinematic number: “5” for the critical temperature. We also discussed how experimental walls (i.e. surfaces of condensed matter) might influence our experimental findings, by forcing gases to obey Avogadro’s hypothesis. We discussed why Avogadro’s hypothesis is not valid at low temperatures and provided some unexpected insights. The fact that the explanations given herein confound certain concepts beheld by traditional thermodynamics cannot be overlooked. Ultimately, before being embraced, or discarded, some experiments may need to be performed. Accordingly, this paper was written in the hope that it at least invokes some discussion, if not provides the groundwork for alternate ways of thinking.