Isochoric Specific Heat in the Dual Model of Liquids
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is very well written, I am recommending publication.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for your revision.
A short subsection had been included to better specify the model as also requested by another reviewer.
The English wording has been also revised.
With my best regards.
Fabio Peluso
Reviewer 2 Report
In this manuscript, the author describes the isochoric specific heat in the novel Dual Model of Liquids and make a critical comparison with the traditional Phonon Theory of Liquid Thermodynamics. This is Dual Model of Liquids consists of small lattice particle embedded into the liquid particle and using harmonic and anharmonic calculation for the wave-packet transportation. There are new physical concepts inside the liquid thermal transport were reported and discussed. It is a valuable scientific document for publication. It can be acceptable with minor revising as shown below.
In reading this manuscript, a few terminologies and acronyms are only shown and defined in the author’s previous paper submitted for publication [reference 1]. Therefore, it is hard to read this manuscript if those terminologies and acronyms are not defined in this manuscript, for examples:
(1) All the variables in the equation of page 2 are not defined.
(2) The full name of “DoF” as degree of freedom is not mentioned at first sight of text.
(3) The full name of “OoM” as Order of Magnitude shown in page 17. It is better to use the full name instead.
The Equations in the page 2 and 3 are not numbered, while the first equation (1) starts from page 5. Should the equation number re-ordered?
In page 7, line 2: Should the eqs (7) through (9) changed to Eqs (6) through (9)?
Some of the terminologies which is only well-defined in the reference 1 and 4 , which is not published yet, can be briefly described also in this manuscript to improve the readability.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
thank you very much for your thorough work in revising the manuscript.
I have considered all the points you have raised and here below you find my comments.
- The mismatch in the numbering of equations is actually due to an issue that occurred in the conversion of the file format from the original I submitted to the one used by the Editorial office as a template. Indeed the numbering of the first equation was skipped in the conversion, and this originated the issue also in the other equations.
- However, to accomplish your right request to better clarify and specify the model, that is the object of another manuscript submitted for publication but not finalized yet by the Editor (it is undergoing a very slow revision process, it was submitted in February 2021, and in a revised version on September, the final answer is still pending), and in particular, of the equations incluided in the caption of Figure 1, I have included in the Introduction a short subsection (marked in red) that better specify the model and the above-cited equations.
- The English wording has been reviewed and some errors identified and corrected.
- The acronym OoM has been eliminated and DoF correctly specified at its first use in the manuscript.
- Finally, one reference has been updated (red marked).
I thank you very much again for your constructive criticism.
With my best regards
Fabio Peluso
Reviewer 3 Report
I have read the Manuscript "Isochoric specific heat in the Dual Model of Liquids" by Fabio Peluso. The work concerns the continuation of a theoretical study about the Dual Model of Liquids (DML). In particular, by deriving the expression for the isochoric specific heat as function of the collective degrees of freedom the authors analyze its dependence on temperature.
The main idea is to divide the elementary interaction in two parts: one in which the lattice particle (the wave-packet) collides with the liquid particle and transfers to it momentum and energy (both kinetic and potential) and one in which the liquid particle relaxes and the energy is returned to the thermal pool through a lattice particle, alike in a tunnel effect.
The manuscript also includes the comparison with results coming from experiments and from different theoretical approaches are discussed.
The work is a very interesting subject material, the results are sounds and the manuscript is well written and organized. Therefore, in my opinion, the paper deserves to be published on Liquids as it is.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for your revision.
A short subsection had been included to better specify the model as requested by another reviewer.
The English wording has been also revised.
With my best regards.
Fabio Peluso
