Why don't marbles naturally arrange themselves like a crystal?











up vote
18
down vote

favorite
6












Most solids are crystalline in nature because the energy released during the formation of ordered structure is more than that released during the formation of disordered structure such that the crystalline state is the lower energy state. So if we take different marbles in a box and shake it then shouldn't they arrange themselves in order to get to a low energy state? But we see they arrange in a disorderly way. Why do different phenomenon occur in these two cases?










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 2




    Object to "Most solids are crystalline in nature". My yard is made of solids, almost none of which are crystals. My driveway is solid and is not a crystal. My windows are solid, but are not a crystal. The crust of the Earth is solid and is not a crystal.
    – Eric Towers
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    But most of the solid are crystalline
    – user342326
    9 hours ago








  • 3




    Your marbles are crystalline. Does this mean any arrangement of them is a crystal? Steel is made of crystal domains -- does this mean steel is a crystal? (No, steel is not a crystal.) Clay is made of crystalline particles. Clay flows like a liquid when barely wetted and under pressure -- clay is not a crystal. Concrete is a solid suspension of many different components, so is an amorphous solid. Glass is not a crystal -- if you want the crystal, you find quartz. Most solids are amorphous suspensions of solids, some of which are crystals.
    – Eric Towers
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    But I studying a book "Solid state of Physics" written by R.K PURI and. V.K BABBAR....., They written that Most solid in nature is crystalline structure
    – user342326
    8 hours ago






  • 2




    Look around you. Are you surrounded by crystals or by disordered amalgams of crystals?
    – Eric Towers
    6 hours ago















up vote
18
down vote

favorite
6












Most solids are crystalline in nature because the energy released during the formation of ordered structure is more than that released during the formation of disordered structure such that the crystalline state is the lower energy state. So if we take different marbles in a box and shake it then shouldn't they arrange themselves in order to get to a low energy state? But we see they arrange in a disorderly way. Why do different phenomenon occur in these two cases?










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 2




    Object to "Most solids are crystalline in nature". My yard is made of solids, almost none of which are crystals. My driveway is solid and is not a crystal. My windows are solid, but are not a crystal. The crust of the Earth is solid and is not a crystal.
    – Eric Towers
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    But most of the solid are crystalline
    – user342326
    9 hours ago








  • 3




    Your marbles are crystalline. Does this mean any arrangement of them is a crystal? Steel is made of crystal domains -- does this mean steel is a crystal? (No, steel is not a crystal.) Clay is made of crystalline particles. Clay flows like a liquid when barely wetted and under pressure -- clay is not a crystal. Concrete is a solid suspension of many different components, so is an amorphous solid. Glass is not a crystal -- if you want the crystal, you find quartz. Most solids are amorphous suspensions of solids, some of which are crystals.
    – Eric Towers
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    But I studying a book "Solid state of Physics" written by R.K PURI and. V.K BABBAR....., They written that Most solid in nature is crystalline structure
    – user342326
    8 hours ago






  • 2




    Look around you. Are you surrounded by crystals or by disordered amalgams of crystals?
    – Eric Towers
    6 hours ago













up vote
18
down vote

favorite
6









up vote
18
down vote

favorite
6






6





Most solids are crystalline in nature because the energy released during the formation of ordered structure is more than that released during the formation of disordered structure such that the crystalline state is the lower energy state. So if we take different marbles in a box and shake it then shouldn't they arrange themselves in order to get to a low energy state? But we see they arrange in a disorderly way. Why do different phenomenon occur in these two cases?










share|cite|improve this question















Most solids are crystalline in nature because the energy released during the formation of ordered structure is more than that released during the formation of disordered structure such that the crystalline state is the lower energy state. So if we take different marbles in a box and shake it then shouldn't they arrange themselves in order to get to a low energy state? But we see they arrange in a disorderly way. Why do different phenomenon occur in these two cases?







solid-state-physics crystals






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 18 hours ago









Kyle Oman

14.1k752107




14.1k752107










asked 19 hours ago









user342326

995




995








  • 2




    Object to "Most solids are crystalline in nature". My yard is made of solids, almost none of which are crystals. My driveway is solid and is not a crystal. My windows are solid, but are not a crystal. The crust of the Earth is solid and is not a crystal.
    – Eric Towers
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    But most of the solid are crystalline
    – user342326
    9 hours ago








  • 3




    Your marbles are crystalline. Does this mean any arrangement of them is a crystal? Steel is made of crystal domains -- does this mean steel is a crystal? (No, steel is not a crystal.) Clay is made of crystalline particles. Clay flows like a liquid when barely wetted and under pressure -- clay is not a crystal. Concrete is a solid suspension of many different components, so is an amorphous solid. Glass is not a crystal -- if you want the crystal, you find quartz. Most solids are amorphous suspensions of solids, some of which are crystals.
    – Eric Towers
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    But I studying a book "Solid state of Physics" written by R.K PURI and. V.K BABBAR....., They written that Most solid in nature is crystalline structure
    – user342326
    8 hours ago






  • 2




    Look around you. Are you surrounded by crystals or by disordered amalgams of crystals?
    – Eric Towers
    6 hours ago














  • 2




    Object to "Most solids are crystalline in nature". My yard is made of solids, almost none of which are crystals. My driveway is solid and is not a crystal. My windows are solid, but are not a crystal. The crust of the Earth is solid and is not a crystal.
    – Eric Towers
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    But most of the solid are crystalline
    – user342326
    9 hours ago








  • 3




    Your marbles are crystalline. Does this mean any arrangement of them is a crystal? Steel is made of crystal domains -- does this mean steel is a crystal? (No, steel is not a crystal.) Clay is made of crystalline particles. Clay flows like a liquid when barely wetted and under pressure -- clay is not a crystal. Concrete is a solid suspension of many different components, so is an amorphous solid. Glass is not a crystal -- if you want the crystal, you find quartz. Most solids are amorphous suspensions of solids, some of which are crystals.
    – Eric Towers
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    But I studying a book "Solid state of Physics" written by R.K PURI and. V.K BABBAR....., They written that Most solid in nature is crystalline structure
    – user342326
    8 hours ago






  • 2




    Look around you. Are you surrounded by crystals or by disordered amalgams of crystals?
    – Eric Towers
    6 hours ago








2




2




Object to "Most solids are crystalline in nature". My yard is made of solids, almost none of which are crystals. My driveway is solid and is not a crystal. My windows are solid, but are not a crystal. The crust of the Earth is solid and is not a crystal.
– Eric Towers
9 hours ago




Object to "Most solids are crystalline in nature". My yard is made of solids, almost none of which are crystals. My driveway is solid and is not a crystal. My windows are solid, but are not a crystal. The crust of the Earth is solid and is not a crystal.
– Eric Towers
9 hours ago




1




1




But most of the solid are crystalline
– user342326
9 hours ago






But most of the solid are crystalline
– user342326
9 hours ago






3




3




Your marbles are crystalline. Does this mean any arrangement of them is a crystal? Steel is made of crystal domains -- does this mean steel is a crystal? (No, steel is not a crystal.) Clay is made of crystalline particles. Clay flows like a liquid when barely wetted and under pressure -- clay is not a crystal. Concrete is a solid suspension of many different components, so is an amorphous solid. Glass is not a crystal -- if you want the crystal, you find quartz. Most solids are amorphous suspensions of solids, some of which are crystals.
– Eric Towers
9 hours ago




Your marbles are crystalline. Does this mean any arrangement of them is a crystal? Steel is made of crystal domains -- does this mean steel is a crystal? (No, steel is not a crystal.) Clay is made of crystalline particles. Clay flows like a liquid when barely wetted and under pressure -- clay is not a crystal. Concrete is a solid suspension of many different components, so is an amorphous solid. Glass is not a crystal -- if you want the crystal, you find quartz. Most solids are amorphous suspensions of solids, some of which are crystals.
– Eric Towers
9 hours ago




1




1




But I studying a book "Solid state of Physics" written by R.K PURI and. V.K BABBAR....., They written that Most solid in nature is crystalline structure
– user342326
8 hours ago




But I studying a book "Solid state of Physics" written by R.K PURI and. V.K BABBAR....., They written that Most solid in nature is crystalline structure
– user342326
8 hours ago




2




2




Look around you. Are you surrounded by crystals or by disordered amalgams of crystals?
– Eric Towers
6 hours ago




Look around you. Are you surrounded by crystals or by disordered amalgams of crystals?
– Eric Towers
6 hours ago










7 Answers
7






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
17
down vote













Interaction between marbles is very similar to the hard sphere (HS) interaction model i.e. a pair-wise potential energy which is zero if spheres do not overlap and $+infty$ elsewhere.



Hard spheres are one of the first systems studied via computer simulation and one of the first big surprise was that by increasing pressure, they are able to crystallize from a disordered fluid to an fcc crystal, in 3D, or to a triangular lattice in 2D. After the first pioneering studies the scenario has been confirmed many times and fully understood. Moreover, in the nineties, the experiments by the Pusey's group in UK have shown that the theoretical scenario is closely followed by colloidal systems designed to mimic as closely as possible a real system of HS (Pusey, P. N., & Van Megen, W. (1986). Phase behaviour of concentrated suspensions of nearly hard colloidal spheres. Nature, 320(6060), 340.)



It is interesting to notice that the HS crystal is stable on the base of entropic reasons. Neither attraction nor quantum mechanics are needed and the density of the coexistent solid at freezing is about 30% smaller than the close packing density (which means that in the HS crystal at the freezing point spheres collides frequently but do not touch all the time). Probably one of the most interesting things about the HS solid is that is a very nice illustration why the naïf equation entropy="spacial disorder" is wrong: the HS crystal has a higher entropy per particle than the coexisting liquid.



What can be said about marbles, taking into account HS? Although their interaction is a very good representation of the HS potential, usually they lack the dynamics underlying the behavior of a true thermodynamic system. Dissipative effects are quite strong and in a short time, without an external continuous feed of energy, the kinetic energy of marbles gets dissipated. In the very old times of the study of liquids, somebody performed experiments with a 2D system of marbles in a tray put on top of a hi fi speaker as a tool to feed kinetic energy randomly. However, without such a flux of energy, what can be observed by shaking a 2D or 3D container almost filled with marbles is that, if the system is highly disordered at the beginning, after some shaking part of the "defects" are eliminated and, at least locally, the system looks like a crystalline solid at the close packing. But this is a situation not directly related with the thermodynamic transition. It has more to do with the stability with respect to perturbations of purely mechanical equilibrium configurations. As a last comment, I would add that the dynamic behavior of marble-like particles has been and still is an active research topic in the physics of granular media.






share|cite|improve this answer

















  • 3




    How can I interprete the fact that entropy is higher in a lattice than in the liquid? Then geometrically or statically this should be true even for interacting (repelling or attracting not just colliding) particle. Please give me a hint. @GiorgioP
    – Alchimista
    13 hours ago






  • 1




    @Alchimista: according to statistical mechanics, the highest is the entropy the largest the number of states in the phase space. Comparing liquid and crystal entropy is the same as comparing the number of states for systems under the constraint: i) there is no long range order (fluid), ii) there is (crystalline solid). While for non interacting systems the configurations in phase space corresponding to i) overcome those corresponding to ii), in a dense interacting system the ordered configurations ensure the maximum available space (as everybody trying to pack a suitcase knows very well).
    – GiorgioP
    13 hours ago










  • Yes but I need a suite case and i do need to pack - ??? If there is a container then it make sense but a crystal does need that
    – Alchimista
    13 hours ago








  • 1




    A crystal at a given density is obtained by packing atoms in a periodically repeated cell of fixed volume. That volume is the "suitcase" for atoms.
    – GiorgioP
    13 hours ago






  • 1




    Interacting means that there are explicit forces between particles. From the point of view of the accessible phase space, in an interacting system, the accessible configuration space is strongly reduced by the presence of the harsh repulsion between particles.
    – GiorgioP
    11 hours ago


















up vote
11
down vote













They do. It is easiest to do show this in two dimensions. I used to demonstrate this on an overhead projector, with lead shot in a transparent CD-case. It is probably better to use smaller spheres (more spheres) than marbles. The other classic demo is with bubble rafts, which can also demonstrate the movement of dislocations.



In three dimensions, it is difficult to see this in a jar. One only observes the regions close to the glass. But I made this video, where I had prepared a regular surface of spheres as a seed:
https://play.lnu.se/media/t/0_bmg6kye7 (after 1:00 minute in the Swedish video)



And very small spheres of glass or plastic can form colloidal close-packed crystals. In nature, this has created gems, opal, when the lattice constant is of the order of the wavelength of visible light.






share|cite|improve this answer



















  • 1




    There is a video which discusses lattice formation and crystal defects in masses of ball bearings and larger spheres (in 2D and 3D) here: youtube.com/watch?v=O3RsDIWB7s0
    – matt_rule
    15 hours ago








  • 1




    You are not addressing the "such that the crystalline state is the lower energy state" . the rearrangement of classical spheres is equipotential at the same gravitational level.. It is at the quantum mechanical level that energy enters the game.
    – anna v
    14 hours ago






  • 2




    @annav It is because of the Earth's gravitational field that close-packed arrangements of marbles are lowest in energy.
    – Pieter
    9 hours ago


















up vote
3
down vote













As HolgerFielder and Pieter said in their answers, marbles do form crystalline arrangements. Notice, though, in Holger Fielder's illustration that the arrangement is much less ordered near a boundary.



If marbles were confined in a way that did not impose hard boundary conditions, then they would almost always form perfectly crystalline arrangements. A jar imposed boundary conditions that are geometrically incompatible with a perfectly crystalline arrangement.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Isn't the real answer that there is not enough time / sufficient high temperature to form large crystals?
    – Peter Mortensen
    10 hours ago












  • The trouble with marbles in an arbitrary jar is that, given gravity abd the hard constraint of the jar shape, the lowest energy configuration is at best close-packed only some distance from the inside surface of the jar. If you cram a close-packed bunch of marbles into the jar, there will be gaps around the edges that a marble won't quite fit into. Shake it up, though, and a few more marbles may fit in. But the close-packed arrangement is disturbed.
    – S. McGrew
    7 hours ago












  • And crystals with real long-range order would not form I think because with marbles there are only contact forces. There is no difference in packing fraction between ABC stacking (face-centered cubic) and ABAB stacking (hexagonally close packed).
    – Pieter
    6 hours ago


















up vote
3
down vote













"So if we take different marbles in a box and shake it then shouldn't they arrange themselves in order to get to a low energy state?"



They certainly do - they will adopt a hexagonal (2D) or close packed (3D) configuration. In a real life scenario we may not immediately see that. That is so because of friction between marbles at their point (or rather area) of contact. However, if you remove that constraint, i.e. assume absence of friction, the entire collection of marbles will adopt the ordered configurations (hexagonal or close packed) after each time you shake the container.






share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




morpheus164 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

























    up vote
    2
    down vote













    This seems to be more a question for chemistry. The reason lays on the atomic bonds.



    First at all, for high enough temperatures all solids will go to a liquid or and gaseous-like state and behave like marbles. And for temperatures near 0 Kelvin the marbles will behave more or less like a crystal.




    ... if we take different marbles in a box and shake it then shouldn't they arrange themselves in order to get to a low energy state.




    It does. Nearly all marbles will lay in the closed-packing of equal spheres.enter image description here



    And why the balls do not stick together an the crystalline level? Because it is needed some activation energy. But that’s all about chemistry.






    share|cite|improve this answer



















    • 2




      Re "...a question for chemistry": "The division between chemistry and physics becomes diffuse at the interface of the two branches ... crystallography ..."
      – Peter Mortensen
      10 hours ago










    • As I understand the question, there are "different marbles" in the box, not equal ones.
      – Paŭlo Ebermann
      6 hours ago


















    up vote
    1
    down vote













    You are confusing two systems. The quantum mechanical of crystalline structure of solids, and the classical marbles , even if they are supposed to be perfect spheres. There is no quantization in the classical state to "lock" a marble in a position, it is free to assume any rotational position and translational on the horizontal, so it becomes a classical statistics problem. If they are packed tight they will organize themselves into a regular structure. If there is space, a single marble on a horizontal level of marbles, (gravity organizes them at levels because of potential energy) cannot "stick" to any position without the slightest impulse sending it sliding over the lower level. There are no bound states.






    share|cite|improve this answer

















    • 1




      No, it is not really quantum mechanical. One can make crystals of colloid spheres. Opals are a natural example.
      – Pieter
      16 hours ago










    • @Pieter I note the "colloid" , is not that molecular binding levels? i.e. quantum mechanics? You can also make structures with LEGO.
      – anna v
      14 hours ago










    • @anna v no is not that molecular level but it doesn't mean that quantum the
      – Alchimista
      13 hours ago










    • Ory isn't at play. The fact is that I find all A reasonable as we are at two different levels. One is merely topological and statistical and one as in crystals including strong interaction. Apparently non binding hs are not at equipotential even in the same gravitational potential. I did ask @GiorgioP for a hint in how to see that.
      – Alchimista
      13 hours ago






    • 1




      @annav No, colloids do not involve quantum mechanics. There are repulsive Coulomb forces because the particles often have a surface charge. Together with confinement, this is probably enough to explain long-range ordering (I do not know much about colloids either).
      – Pieter
      9 hours ago


















    up vote
    1
    down vote













    You should study annealing. Vastly oversimplifying:




    • If you cool the sample slowly enough, it retains enough energy long enough to explore its state space and find very low entropy, crystalline, states.

    • If you cool a sample rapidly, it loses energy too rapidly to explore more than a tiny neighborhood of its state space, and produces non-crystalline states.


    In your example with shaking marbles, you cool very rapidly. To simulate slow cooling, you would shake for a very long time, gradually tapering the amplitude of the shaking. Given the energy barrier to dislocation with reasonably sized marbles, you would have to taper very slowly.



    Note that shaking may not be the best way to provide energy to the system to quickly find deep valleys in the energy landscape. "Dice Become Ordered When Stirred, Not Shaken" (The article also shows that too rapid stirring prevents settling to an ordered state -- the system continues exploring nearby less ordered states.)






    share|cite|improve this answer





















      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "151"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














       

      draft saved


      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f443130%2fwhy-dont-marbles-naturally-arrange-themselves-like-a-crystal%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      7 Answers
      7






      active

      oldest

      votes








      7 Answers
      7






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes








      up vote
      17
      down vote













      Interaction between marbles is very similar to the hard sphere (HS) interaction model i.e. a pair-wise potential energy which is zero if spheres do not overlap and $+infty$ elsewhere.



      Hard spheres are one of the first systems studied via computer simulation and one of the first big surprise was that by increasing pressure, they are able to crystallize from a disordered fluid to an fcc crystal, in 3D, or to a triangular lattice in 2D. After the first pioneering studies the scenario has been confirmed many times and fully understood. Moreover, in the nineties, the experiments by the Pusey's group in UK have shown that the theoretical scenario is closely followed by colloidal systems designed to mimic as closely as possible a real system of HS (Pusey, P. N., & Van Megen, W. (1986). Phase behaviour of concentrated suspensions of nearly hard colloidal spheres. Nature, 320(6060), 340.)



      It is interesting to notice that the HS crystal is stable on the base of entropic reasons. Neither attraction nor quantum mechanics are needed and the density of the coexistent solid at freezing is about 30% smaller than the close packing density (which means that in the HS crystal at the freezing point spheres collides frequently but do not touch all the time). Probably one of the most interesting things about the HS solid is that is a very nice illustration why the naïf equation entropy="spacial disorder" is wrong: the HS crystal has a higher entropy per particle than the coexisting liquid.



      What can be said about marbles, taking into account HS? Although their interaction is a very good representation of the HS potential, usually they lack the dynamics underlying the behavior of a true thermodynamic system. Dissipative effects are quite strong and in a short time, without an external continuous feed of energy, the kinetic energy of marbles gets dissipated. In the very old times of the study of liquids, somebody performed experiments with a 2D system of marbles in a tray put on top of a hi fi speaker as a tool to feed kinetic energy randomly. However, without such a flux of energy, what can be observed by shaking a 2D or 3D container almost filled with marbles is that, if the system is highly disordered at the beginning, after some shaking part of the "defects" are eliminated and, at least locally, the system looks like a crystalline solid at the close packing. But this is a situation not directly related with the thermodynamic transition. It has more to do with the stability with respect to perturbations of purely mechanical equilibrium configurations. As a last comment, I would add that the dynamic behavior of marble-like particles has been and still is an active research topic in the physics of granular media.






      share|cite|improve this answer

















      • 3




        How can I interprete the fact that entropy is higher in a lattice than in the liquid? Then geometrically or statically this should be true even for interacting (repelling or attracting not just colliding) particle. Please give me a hint. @GiorgioP
        – Alchimista
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        @Alchimista: according to statistical mechanics, the highest is the entropy the largest the number of states in the phase space. Comparing liquid and crystal entropy is the same as comparing the number of states for systems under the constraint: i) there is no long range order (fluid), ii) there is (crystalline solid). While for non interacting systems the configurations in phase space corresponding to i) overcome those corresponding to ii), in a dense interacting system the ordered configurations ensure the maximum available space (as everybody trying to pack a suitcase knows very well).
        – GiorgioP
        13 hours ago










      • Yes but I need a suite case and i do need to pack - ??? If there is a container then it make sense but a crystal does need that
        – Alchimista
        13 hours ago








      • 1




        A crystal at a given density is obtained by packing atoms in a periodically repeated cell of fixed volume. That volume is the "suitcase" for atoms.
        – GiorgioP
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        Interacting means that there are explicit forces between particles. From the point of view of the accessible phase space, in an interacting system, the accessible configuration space is strongly reduced by the presence of the harsh repulsion between particles.
        – GiorgioP
        11 hours ago















      up vote
      17
      down vote













      Interaction between marbles is very similar to the hard sphere (HS) interaction model i.e. a pair-wise potential energy which is zero if spheres do not overlap and $+infty$ elsewhere.



      Hard spheres are one of the first systems studied via computer simulation and one of the first big surprise was that by increasing pressure, they are able to crystallize from a disordered fluid to an fcc crystal, in 3D, or to a triangular lattice in 2D. After the first pioneering studies the scenario has been confirmed many times and fully understood. Moreover, in the nineties, the experiments by the Pusey's group in UK have shown that the theoretical scenario is closely followed by colloidal systems designed to mimic as closely as possible a real system of HS (Pusey, P. N., & Van Megen, W. (1986). Phase behaviour of concentrated suspensions of nearly hard colloidal spheres. Nature, 320(6060), 340.)



      It is interesting to notice that the HS crystal is stable on the base of entropic reasons. Neither attraction nor quantum mechanics are needed and the density of the coexistent solid at freezing is about 30% smaller than the close packing density (which means that in the HS crystal at the freezing point spheres collides frequently but do not touch all the time). Probably one of the most interesting things about the HS solid is that is a very nice illustration why the naïf equation entropy="spacial disorder" is wrong: the HS crystal has a higher entropy per particle than the coexisting liquid.



      What can be said about marbles, taking into account HS? Although their interaction is a very good representation of the HS potential, usually they lack the dynamics underlying the behavior of a true thermodynamic system. Dissipative effects are quite strong and in a short time, without an external continuous feed of energy, the kinetic energy of marbles gets dissipated. In the very old times of the study of liquids, somebody performed experiments with a 2D system of marbles in a tray put on top of a hi fi speaker as a tool to feed kinetic energy randomly. However, without such a flux of energy, what can be observed by shaking a 2D or 3D container almost filled with marbles is that, if the system is highly disordered at the beginning, after some shaking part of the "defects" are eliminated and, at least locally, the system looks like a crystalline solid at the close packing. But this is a situation not directly related with the thermodynamic transition. It has more to do with the stability with respect to perturbations of purely mechanical equilibrium configurations. As a last comment, I would add that the dynamic behavior of marble-like particles has been and still is an active research topic in the physics of granular media.






      share|cite|improve this answer

















      • 3




        How can I interprete the fact that entropy is higher in a lattice than in the liquid? Then geometrically or statically this should be true even for interacting (repelling or attracting not just colliding) particle. Please give me a hint. @GiorgioP
        – Alchimista
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        @Alchimista: according to statistical mechanics, the highest is the entropy the largest the number of states in the phase space. Comparing liquid and crystal entropy is the same as comparing the number of states for systems under the constraint: i) there is no long range order (fluid), ii) there is (crystalline solid). While for non interacting systems the configurations in phase space corresponding to i) overcome those corresponding to ii), in a dense interacting system the ordered configurations ensure the maximum available space (as everybody trying to pack a suitcase knows very well).
        – GiorgioP
        13 hours ago










      • Yes but I need a suite case and i do need to pack - ??? If there is a container then it make sense but a crystal does need that
        – Alchimista
        13 hours ago








      • 1




        A crystal at a given density is obtained by packing atoms in a periodically repeated cell of fixed volume. That volume is the "suitcase" for atoms.
        – GiorgioP
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        Interacting means that there are explicit forces between particles. From the point of view of the accessible phase space, in an interacting system, the accessible configuration space is strongly reduced by the presence of the harsh repulsion between particles.
        – GiorgioP
        11 hours ago













      up vote
      17
      down vote










      up vote
      17
      down vote









      Interaction between marbles is very similar to the hard sphere (HS) interaction model i.e. a pair-wise potential energy which is zero if spheres do not overlap and $+infty$ elsewhere.



      Hard spheres are one of the first systems studied via computer simulation and one of the first big surprise was that by increasing pressure, they are able to crystallize from a disordered fluid to an fcc crystal, in 3D, or to a triangular lattice in 2D. After the first pioneering studies the scenario has been confirmed many times and fully understood. Moreover, in the nineties, the experiments by the Pusey's group in UK have shown that the theoretical scenario is closely followed by colloidal systems designed to mimic as closely as possible a real system of HS (Pusey, P. N., & Van Megen, W. (1986). Phase behaviour of concentrated suspensions of nearly hard colloidal spheres. Nature, 320(6060), 340.)



      It is interesting to notice that the HS crystal is stable on the base of entropic reasons. Neither attraction nor quantum mechanics are needed and the density of the coexistent solid at freezing is about 30% smaller than the close packing density (which means that in the HS crystal at the freezing point spheres collides frequently but do not touch all the time). Probably one of the most interesting things about the HS solid is that is a very nice illustration why the naïf equation entropy="spacial disorder" is wrong: the HS crystal has a higher entropy per particle than the coexisting liquid.



      What can be said about marbles, taking into account HS? Although their interaction is a very good representation of the HS potential, usually they lack the dynamics underlying the behavior of a true thermodynamic system. Dissipative effects are quite strong and in a short time, without an external continuous feed of energy, the kinetic energy of marbles gets dissipated. In the very old times of the study of liquids, somebody performed experiments with a 2D system of marbles in a tray put on top of a hi fi speaker as a tool to feed kinetic energy randomly. However, without such a flux of energy, what can be observed by shaking a 2D or 3D container almost filled with marbles is that, if the system is highly disordered at the beginning, after some shaking part of the "defects" are eliminated and, at least locally, the system looks like a crystalline solid at the close packing. But this is a situation not directly related with the thermodynamic transition. It has more to do with the stability with respect to perturbations of purely mechanical equilibrium configurations. As a last comment, I would add that the dynamic behavior of marble-like particles has been and still is an active research topic in the physics of granular media.






      share|cite|improve this answer












      Interaction between marbles is very similar to the hard sphere (HS) interaction model i.e. a pair-wise potential energy which is zero if spheres do not overlap and $+infty$ elsewhere.



      Hard spheres are one of the first systems studied via computer simulation and one of the first big surprise was that by increasing pressure, they are able to crystallize from a disordered fluid to an fcc crystal, in 3D, or to a triangular lattice in 2D. After the first pioneering studies the scenario has been confirmed many times and fully understood. Moreover, in the nineties, the experiments by the Pusey's group in UK have shown that the theoretical scenario is closely followed by colloidal systems designed to mimic as closely as possible a real system of HS (Pusey, P. N., & Van Megen, W. (1986). Phase behaviour of concentrated suspensions of nearly hard colloidal spheres. Nature, 320(6060), 340.)



      It is interesting to notice that the HS crystal is stable on the base of entropic reasons. Neither attraction nor quantum mechanics are needed and the density of the coexistent solid at freezing is about 30% smaller than the close packing density (which means that in the HS crystal at the freezing point spheres collides frequently but do not touch all the time). Probably one of the most interesting things about the HS solid is that is a very nice illustration why the naïf equation entropy="spacial disorder" is wrong: the HS crystal has a higher entropy per particle than the coexisting liquid.



      What can be said about marbles, taking into account HS? Although their interaction is a very good representation of the HS potential, usually they lack the dynamics underlying the behavior of a true thermodynamic system. Dissipative effects are quite strong and in a short time, without an external continuous feed of energy, the kinetic energy of marbles gets dissipated. In the very old times of the study of liquids, somebody performed experiments with a 2D system of marbles in a tray put on top of a hi fi speaker as a tool to feed kinetic energy randomly. However, without such a flux of energy, what can be observed by shaking a 2D or 3D container almost filled with marbles is that, if the system is highly disordered at the beginning, after some shaking part of the "defects" are eliminated and, at least locally, the system looks like a crystalline solid at the close packing. But this is a situation not directly related with the thermodynamic transition. It has more to do with the stability with respect to perturbations of purely mechanical equilibrium configurations. As a last comment, I would add that the dynamic behavior of marble-like particles has been and still is an active research topic in the physics of granular media.







      share|cite|improve this answer












      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer










      answered 16 hours ago









      GiorgioP

      5389




      5389








      • 3




        How can I interprete the fact that entropy is higher in a lattice than in the liquid? Then geometrically or statically this should be true even for interacting (repelling or attracting not just colliding) particle. Please give me a hint. @GiorgioP
        – Alchimista
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        @Alchimista: according to statistical mechanics, the highest is the entropy the largest the number of states in the phase space. Comparing liquid and crystal entropy is the same as comparing the number of states for systems under the constraint: i) there is no long range order (fluid), ii) there is (crystalline solid). While for non interacting systems the configurations in phase space corresponding to i) overcome those corresponding to ii), in a dense interacting system the ordered configurations ensure the maximum available space (as everybody trying to pack a suitcase knows very well).
        – GiorgioP
        13 hours ago










      • Yes but I need a suite case and i do need to pack - ??? If there is a container then it make sense but a crystal does need that
        – Alchimista
        13 hours ago








      • 1




        A crystal at a given density is obtained by packing atoms in a periodically repeated cell of fixed volume. That volume is the "suitcase" for atoms.
        – GiorgioP
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        Interacting means that there are explicit forces between particles. From the point of view of the accessible phase space, in an interacting system, the accessible configuration space is strongly reduced by the presence of the harsh repulsion between particles.
        – GiorgioP
        11 hours ago














      • 3




        How can I interprete the fact that entropy is higher in a lattice than in the liquid? Then geometrically or statically this should be true even for interacting (repelling or attracting not just colliding) particle. Please give me a hint. @GiorgioP
        – Alchimista
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        @Alchimista: according to statistical mechanics, the highest is the entropy the largest the number of states in the phase space. Comparing liquid and crystal entropy is the same as comparing the number of states for systems under the constraint: i) there is no long range order (fluid), ii) there is (crystalline solid). While for non interacting systems the configurations in phase space corresponding to i) overcome those corresponding to ii), in a dense interacting system the ordered configurations ensure the maximum available space (as everybody trying to pack a suitcase knows very well).
        – GiorgioP
        13 hours ago










      • Yes but I need a suite case and i do need to pack - ??? If there is a container then it make sense but a crystal does need that
        – Alchimista
        13 hours ago








      • 1




        A crystal at a given density is obtained by packing atoms in a periodically repeated cell of fixed volume. That volume is the "suitcase" for atoms.
        – GiorgioP
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        Interacting means that there are explicit forces between particles. From the point of view of the accessible phase space, in an interacting system, the accessible configuration space is strongly reduced by the presence of the harsh repulsion between particles.
        – GiorgioP
        11 hours ago








      3




      3




      How can I interprete the fact that entropy is higher in a lattice than in the liquid? Then geometrically or statically this should be true even for interacting (repelling or attracting not just colliding) particle. Please give me a hint. @GiorgioP
      – Alchimista
      13 hours ago




      How can I interprete the fact that entropy is higher in a lattice than in the liquid? Then geometrically or statically this should be true even for interacting (repelling or attracting not just colliding) particle. Please give me a hint. @GiorgioP
      – Alchimista
      13 hours ago




      1




      1




      @Alchimista: according to statistical mechanics, the highest is the entropy the largest the number of states in the phase space. Comparing liquid and crystal entropy is the same as comparing the number of states for systems under the constraint: i) there is no long range order (fluid), ii) there is (crystalline solid). While for non interacting systems the configurations in phase space corresponding to i) overcome those corresponding to ii), in a dense interacting system the ordered configurations ensure the maximum available space (as everybody trying to pack a suitcase knows very well).
      – GiorgioP
      13 hours ago




      @Alchimista: according to statistical mechanics, the highest is the entropy the largest the number of states in the phase space. Comparing liquid and crystal entropy is the same as comparing the number of states for systems under the constraint: i) there is no long range order (fluid), ii) there is (crystalline solid). While for non interacting systems the configurations in phase space corresponding to i) overcome those corresponding to ii), in a dense interacting system the ordered configurations ensure the maximum available space (as everybody trying to pack a suitcase knows very well).
      – GiorgioP
      13 hours ago












      Yes but I need a suite case and i do need to pack - ??? If there is a container then it make sense but a crystal does need that
      – Alchimista
      13 hours ago






      Yes but I need a suite case and i do need to pack - ??? If there is a container then it make sense but a crystal does need that
      – Alchimista
      13 hours ago






      1




      1




      A crystal at a given density is obtained by packing atoms in a periodically repeated cell of fixed volume. That volume is the "suitcase" for atoms.
      – GiorgioP
      13 hours ago




      A crystal at a given density is obtained by packing atoms in a periodically repeated cell of fixed volume. That volume is the "suitcase" for atoms.
      – GiorgioP
      13 hours ago




      1




      1




      Interacting means that there are explicit forces between particles. From the point of view of the accessible phase space, in an interacting system, the accessible configuration space is strongly reduced by the presence of the harsh repulsion between particles.
      – GiorgioP
      11 hours ago




      Interacting means that there are explicit forces between particles. From the point of view of the accessible phase space, in an interacting system, the accessible configuration space is strongly reduced by the presence of the harsh repulsion between particles.
      – GiorgioP
      11 hours ago










      up vote
      11
      down vote













      They do. It is easiest to do show this in two dimensions. I used to demonstrate this on an overhead projector, with lead shot in a transparent CD-case. It is probably better to use smaller spheres (more spheres) than marbles. The other classic demo is with bubble rafts, which can also demonstrate the movement of dislocations.



      In three dimensions, it is difficult to see this in a jar. One only observes the regions close to the glass. But I made this video, where I had prepared a regular surface of spheres as a seed:
      https://play.lnu.se/media/t/0_bmg6kye7 (after 1:00 minute in the Swedish video)



      And very small spheres of glass or plastic can form colloidal close-packed crystals. In nature, this has created gems, opal, when the lattice constant is of the order of the wavelength of visible light.






      share|cite|improve this answer



















      • 1




        There is a video which discusses lattice formation and crystal defects in masses of ball bearings and larger spheres (in 2D and 3D) here: youtube.com/watch?v=O3RsDIWB7s0
        – matt_rule
        15 hours ago








      • 1




        You are not addressing the "such that the crystalline state is the lower energy state" . the rearrangement of classical spheres is equipotential at the same gravitational level.. It is at the quantum mechanical level that energy enters the game.
        – anna v
        14 hours ago






      • 2




        @annav It is because of the Earth's gravitational field that close-packed arrangements of marbles are lowest in energy.
        – Pieter
        9 hours ago















      up vote
      11
      down vote













      They do. It is easiest to do show this in two dimensions. I used to demonstrate this on an overhead projector, with lead shot in a transparent CD-case. It is probably better to use smaller spheres (more spheres) than marbles. The other classic demo is with bubble rafts, which can also demonstrate the movement of dislocations.



      In three dimensions, it is difficult to see this in a jar. One only observes the regions close to the glass. But I made this video, where I had prepared a regular surface of spheres as a seed:
      https://play.lnu.se/media/t/0_bmg6kye7 (after 1:00 minute in the Swedish video)



      And very small spheres of glass or plastic can form colloidal close-packed crystals. In nature, this has created gems, opal, when the lattice constant is of the order of the wavelength of visible light.






      share|cite|improve this answer



















      • 1




        There is a video which discusses lattice formation and crystal defects in masses of ball bearings and larger spheres (in 2D and 3D) here: youtube.com/watch?v=O3RsDIWB7s0
        – matt_rule
        15 hours ago








      • 1




        You are not addressing the "such that the crystalline state is the lower energy state" . the rearrangement of classical spheres is equipotential at the same gravitational level.. It is at the quantum mechanical level that energy enters the game.
        – anna v
        14 hours ago






      • 2




        @annav It is because of the Earth's gravitational field that close-packed arrangements of marbles are lowest in energy.
        – Pieter
        9 hours ago













      up vote
      11
      down vote










      up vote
      11
      down vote









      They do. It is easiest to do show this in two dimensions. I used to demonstrate this on an overhead projector, with lead shot in a transparent CD-case. It is probably better to use smaller spheres (more spheres) than marbles. The other classic demo is with bubble rafts, which can also demonstrate the movement of dislocations.



      In three dimensions, it is difficult to see this in a jar. One only observes the regions close to the glass. But I made this video, where I had prepared a regular surface of spheres as a seed:
      https://play.lnu.se/media/t/0_bmg6kye7 (after 1:00 minute in the Swedish video)



      And very small spheres of glass or plastic can form colloidal close-packed crystals. In nature, this has created gems, opal, when the lattice constant is of the order of the wavelength of visible light.






      share|cite|improve this answer














      They do. It is easiest to do show this in two dimensions. I used to demonstrate this on an overhead projector, with lead shot in a transparent CD-case. It is probably better to use smaller spheres (more spheres) than marbles. The other classic demo is with bubble rafts, which can also demonstrate the movement of dislocations.



      In three dimensions, it is difficult to see this in a jar. One only observes the regions close to the glass. But I made this video, where I had prepared a regular surface of spheres as a seed:
      https://play.lnu.se/media/t/0_bmg6kye7 (after 1:00 minute in the Swedish video)



      And very small spheres of glass or plastic can form colloidal close-packed crystals. In nature, this has created gems, opal, when the lattice constant is of the order of the wavelength of visible light.







      share|cite|improve this answer














      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer








      edited 16 hours ago

























      answered 16 hours ago









      Pieter

      7,08231330




      7,08231330








      • 1




        There is a video which discusses lattice formation and crystal defects in masses of ball bearings and larger spheres (in 2D and 3D) here: youtube.com/watch?v=O3RsDIWB7s0
        – matt_rule
        15 hours ago








      • 1




        You are not addressing the "such that the crystalline state is the lower energy state" . the rearrangement of classical spheres is equipotential at the same gravitational level.. It is at the quantum mechanical level that energy enters the game.
        – anna v
        14 hours ago






      • 2




        @annav It is because of the Earth's gravitational field that close-packed arrangements of marbles are lowest in energy.
        – Pieter
        9 hours ago














      • 1




        There is a video which discusses lattice formation and crystal defects in masses of ball bearings and larger spheres (in 2D and 3D) here: youtube.com/watch?v=O3RsDIWB7s0
        – matt_rule
        15 hours ago








      • 1




        You are not addressing the "such that the crystalline state is the lower energy state" . the rearrangement of classical spheres is equipotential at the same gravitational level.. It is at the quantum mechanical level that energy enters the game.
        – anna v
        14 hours ago






      • 2




        @annav It is because of the Earth's gravitational field that close-packed arrangements of marbles are lowest in energy.
        – Pieter
        9 hours ago








      1




      1




      There is a video which discusses lattice formation and crystal defects in masses of ball bearings and larger spheres (in 2D and 3D) here: youtube.com/watch?v=O3RsDIWB7s0
      – matt_rule
      15 hours ago






      There is a video which discusses lattice formation and crystal defects in masses of ball bearings and larger spheres (in 2D and 3D) here: youtube.com/watch?v=O3RsDIWB7s0
      – matt_rule
      15 hours ago






      1




      1




      You are not addressing the "such that the crystalline state is the lower energy state" . the rearrangement of classical spheres is equipotential at the same gravitational level.. It is at the quantum mechanical level that energy enters the game.
      – anna v
      14 hours ago




      You are not addressing the "such that the crystalline state is the lower energy state" . the rearrangement of classical spheres is equipotential at the same gravitational level.. It is at the quantum mechanical level that energy enters the game.
      – anna v
      14 hours ago




      2




      2




      @annav It is because of the Earth's gravitational field that close-packed arrangements of marbles are lowest in energy.
      – Pieter
      9 hours ago




      @annav It is because of the Earth's gravitational field that close-packed arrangements of marbles are lowest in energy.
      – Pieter
      9 hours ago










      up vote
      3
      down vote













      As HolgerFielder and Pieter said in their answers, marbles do form crystalline arrangements. Notice, though, in Holger Fielder's illustration that the arrangement is much less ordered near a boundary.



      If marbles were confined in a way that did not impose hard boundary conditions, then they would almost always form perfectly crystalline arrangements. A jar imposed boundary conditions that are geometrically incompatible with a perfectly crystalline arrangement.






      share|cite|improve this answer





















      • Isn't the real answer that there is not enough time / sufficient high temperature to form large crystals?
        – Peter Mortensen
        10 hours ago












      • The trouble with marbles in an arbitrary jar is that, given gravity abd the hard constraint of the jar shape, the lowest energy configuration is at best close-packed only some distance from the inside surface of the jar. If you cram a close-packed bunch of marbles into the jar, there will be gaps around the edges that a marble won't quite fit into. Shake it up, though, and a few more marbles may fit in. But the close-packed arrangement is disturbed.
        – S. McGrew
        7 hours ago












      • And crystals with real long-range order would not form I think because with marbles there are only contact forces. There is no difference in packing fraction between ABC stacking (face-centered cubic) and ABAB stacking (hexagonally close packed).
        – Pieter
        6 hours ago















      up vote
      3
      down vote













      As HolgerFielder and Pieter said in their answers, marbles do form crystalline arrangements. Notice, though, in Holger Fielder's illustration that the arrangement is much less ordered near a boundary.



      If marbles were confined in a way that did not impose hard boundary conditions, then they would almost always form perfectly crystalline arrangements. A jar imposed boundary conditions that are geometrically incompatible with a perfectly crystalline arrangement.






      share|cite|improve this answer





















      • Isn't the real answer that there is not enough time / sufficient high temperature to form large crystals?
        – Peter Mortensen
        10 hours ago












      • The trouble with marbles in an arbitrary jar is that, given gravity abd the hard constraint of the jar shape, the lowest energy configuration is at best close-packed only some distance from the inside surface of the jar. If you cram a close-packed bunch of marbles into the jar, there will be gaps around the edges that a marble won't quite fit into. Shake it up, though, and a few more marbles may fit in. But the close-packed arrangement is disturbed.
        – S. McGrew
        7 hours ago












      • And crystals with real long-range order would not form I think because with marbles there are only contact forces. There is no difference in packing fraction between ABC stacking (face-centered cubic) and ABAB stacking (hexagonally close packed).
        – Pieter
        6 hours ago













      up vote
      3
      down vote










      up vote
      3
      down vote









      As HolgerFielder and Pieter said in their answers, marbles do form crystalline arrangements. Notice, though, in Holger Fielder's illustration that the arrangement is much less ordered near a boundary.



      If marbles were confined in a way that did not impose hard boundary conditions, then they would almost always form perfectly crystalline arrangements. A jar imposed boundary conditions that are geometrically incompatible with a perfectly crystalline arrangement.






      share|cite|improve this answer












      As HolgerFielder and Pieter said in their answers, marbles do form crystalline arrangements. Notice, though, in Holger Fielder's illustration that the arrangement is much less ordered near a boundary.



      If marbles were confined in a way that did not impose hard boundary conditions, then they would almost always form perfectly crystalline arrangements. A jar imposed boundary conditions that are geometrically incompatible with a perfectly crystalline arrangement.







      share|cite|improve this answer












      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer










      answered 13 hours ago









      S. McGrew

      5,3662923




      5,3662923












      • Isn't the real answer that there is not enough time / sufficient high temperature to form large crystals?
        – Peter Mortensen
        10 hours ago












      • The trouble with marbles in an arbitrary jar is that, given gravity abd the hard constraint of the jar shape, the lowest energy configuration is at best close-packed only some distance from the inside surface of the jar. If you cram a close-packed bunch of marbles into the jar, there will be gaps around the edges that a marble won't quite fit into. Shake it up, though, and a few more marbles may fit in. But the close-packed arrangement is disturbed.
        – S. McGrew
        7 hours ago












      • And crystals with real long-range order would not form I think because with marbles there are only contact forces. There is no difference in packing fraction between ABC stacking (face-centered cubic) and ABAB stacking (hexagonally close packed).
        – Pieter
        6 hours ago


















      • Isn't the real answer that there is not enough time / sufficient high temperature to form large crystals?
        – Peter Mortensen
        10 hours ago












      • The trouble with marbles in an arbitrary jar is that, given gravity abd the hard constraint of the jar shape, the lowest energy configuration is at best close-packed only some distance from the inside surface of the jar. If you cram a close-packed bunch of marbles into the jar, there will be gaps around the edges that a marble won't quite fit into. Shake it up, though, and a few more marbles may fit in. But the close-packed arrangement is disturbed.
        – S. McGrew
        7 hours ago












      • And crystals with real long-range order would not form I think because with marbles there are only contact forces. There is no difference in packing fraction between ABC stacking (face-centered cubic) and ABAB stacking (hexagonally close packed).
        – Pieter
        6 hours ago
















      Isn't the real answer that there is not enough time / sufficient high temperature to form large crystals?
      – Peter Mortensen
      10 hours ago






      Isn't the real answer that there is not enough time / sufficient high temperature to form large crystals?
      – Peter Mortensen
      10 hours ago














      The trouble with marbles in an arbitrary jar is that, given gravity abd the hard constraint of the jar shape, the lowest energy configuration is at best close-packed only some distance from the inside surface of the jar. If you cram a close-packed bunch of marbles into the jar, there will be gaps around the edges that a marble won't quite fit into. Shake it up, though, and a few more marbles may fit in. But the close-packed arrangement is disturbed.
      – S. McGrew
      7 hours ago






      The trouble with marbles in an arbitrary jar is that, given gravity abd the hard constraint of the jar shape, the lowest energy configuration is at best close-packed only some distance from the inside surface of the jar. If you cram a close-packed bunch of marbles into the jar, there will be gaps around the edges that a marble won't quite fit into. Shake it up, though, and a few more marbles may fit in. But the close-packed arrangement is disturbed.
      – S. McGrew
      7 hours ago














      And crystals with real long-range order would not form I think because with marbles there are only contact forces. There is no difference in packing fraction between ABC stacking (face-centered cubic) and ABAB stacking (hexagonally close packed).
      – Pieter
      6 hours ago




      And crystals with real long-range order would not form I think because with marbles there are only contact forces. There is no difference in packing fraction between ABC stacking (face-centered cubic) and ABAB stacking (hexagonally close packed).
      – Pieter
      6 hours ago










      up vote
      3
      down vote













      "So if we take different marbles in a box and shake it then shouldn't they arrange themselves in order to get to a low energy state?"



      They certainly do - they will adopt a hexagonal (2D) or close packed (3D) configuration. In a real life scenario we may not immediately see that. That is so because of friction between marbles at their point (or rather area) of contact. However, if you remove that constraint, i.e. assume absence of friction, the entire collection of marbles will adopt the ordered configurations (hexagonal or close packed) after each time you shake the container.






      share|cite|improve this answer








      New contributor




      morpheus164 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















        up vote
        3
        down vote













        "So if we take different marbles in a box and shake it then shouldn't they arrange themselves in order to get to a low energy state?"



        They certainly do - they will adopt a hexagonal (2D) or close packed (3D) configuration. In a real life scenario we may not immediately see that. That is so because of friction between marbles at their point (or rather area) of contact. However, if you remove that constraint, i.e. assume absence of friction, the entire collection of marbles will adopt the ordered configurations (hexagonal or close packed) after each time you shake the container.






        share|cite|improve this answer








        New contributor




        morpheus164 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.




















          up vote
          3
          down vote










          up vote
          3
          down vote









          "So if we take different marbles in a box and shake it then shouldn't they arrange themselves in order to get to a low energy state?"



          They certainly do - they will adopt a hexagonal (2D) or close packed (3D) configuration. In a real life scenario we may not immediately see that. That is so because of friction between marbles at their point (or rather area) of contact. However, if you remove that constraint, i.e. assume absence of friction, the entire collection of marbles will adopt the ordered configurations (hexagonal or close packed) after each time you shake the container.






          share|cite|improve this answer








          New contributor




          morpheus164 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          "So if we take different marbles in a box and shake it then shouldn't they arrange themselves in order to get to a low energy state?"



          They certainly do - they will adopt a hexagonal (2D) or close packed (3D) configuration. In a real life scenario we may not immediately see that. That is so because of friction between marbles at their point (or rather area) of contact. However, if you remove that constraint, i.e. assume absence of friction, the entire collection of marbles will adopt the ordered configurations (hexagonal or close packed) after each time you shake the container.







          share|cite|improve this answer








          New contributor




          morpheus164 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer






          New contributor




          morpheus164 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          answered 11 hours ago









          morpheus164

          311




          311




          New contributor




          morpheus164 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.





          New contributor





          morpheus164 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.






          morpheus164 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.






















              up vote
              2
              down vote













              This seems to be more a question for chemistry. The reason lays on the atomic bonds.



              First at all, for high enough temperatures all solids will go to a liquid or and gaseous-like state and behave like marbles. And for temperatures near 0 Kelvin the marbles will behave more or less like a crystal.




              ... if we take different marbles in a box and shake it then shouldn't they arrange themselves in order to get to a low energy state.




              It does. Nearly all marbles will lay in the closed-packing of equal spheres.enter image description here



              And why the balls do not stick together an the crystalline level? Because it is needed some activation energy. But that’s all about chemistry.






              share|cite|improve this answer



















              • 2




                Re "...a question for chemistry": "The division between chemistry and physics becomes diffuse at the interface of the two branches ... crystallography ..."
                – Peter Mortensen
                10 hours ago










              • As I understand the question, there are "different marbles" in the box, not equal ones.
                – Paŭlo Ebermann
                6 hours ago















              up vote
              2
              down vote













              This seems to be more a question for chemistry. The reason lays on the atomic bonds.



              First at all, for high enough temperatures all solids will go to a liquid or and gaseous-like state and behave like marbles. And for temperatures near 0 Kelvin the marbles will behave more or less like a crystal.




              ... if we take different marbles in a box and shake it then shouldn't they arrange themselves in order to get to a low energy state.




              It does. Nearly all marbles will lay in the closed-packing of equal spheres.enter image description here



              And why the balls do not stick together an the crystalline level? Because it is needed some activation energy. But that’s all about chemistry.






              share|cite|improve this answer



















              • 2




                Re "...a question for chemistry": "The division between chemistry and physics becomes diffuse at the interface of the two branches ... crystallography ..."
                – Peter Mortensen
                10 hours ago










              • As I understand the question, there are "different marbles" in the box, not equal ones.
                – Paŭlo Ebermann
                6 hours ago













              up vote
              2
              down vote










              up vote
              2
              down vote









              This seems to be more a question for chemistry. The reason lays on the atomic bonds.



              First at all, for high enough temperatures all solids will go to a liquid or and gaseous-like state and behave like marbles. And for temperatures near 0 Kelvin the marbles will behave more or less like a crystal.




              ... if we take different marbles in a box and shake it then shouldn't they arrange themselves in order to get to a low energy state.




              It does. Nearly all marbles will lay in the closed-packing of equal spheres.enter image description here



              And why the balls do not stick together an the crystalline level? Because it is needed some activation energy. But that’s all about chemistry.






              share|cite|improve this answer














              This seems to be more a question for chemistry. The reason lays on the atomic bonds.



              First at all, for high enough temperatures all solids will go to a liquid or and gaseous-like state and behave like marbles. And for temperatures near 0 Kelvin the marbles will behave more or less like a crystal.




              ... if we take different marbles in a box and shake it then shouldn't they arrange themselves in order to get to a low energy state.




              It does. Nearly all marbles will lay in the closed-packing of equal spheres.enter image description here



              And why the balls do not stick together an the crystalline level? Because it is needed some activation energy. But that’s all about chemistry.







              share|cite|improve this answer














              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer








              edited 10 hours ago

























              answered 19 hours ago









              HolgerFiedler

              3,88531133




              3,88531133








              • 2




                Re "...a question for chemistry": "The division between chemistry and physics becomes diffuse at the interface of the two branches ... crystallography ..."
                – Peter Mortensen
                10 hours ago










              • As I understand the question, there are "different marbles" in the box, not equal ones.
                – Paŭlo Ebermann
                6 hours ago














              • 2




                Re "...a question for chemistry": "The division between chemistry and physics becomes diffuse at the interface of the two branches ... crystallography ..."
                – Peter Mortensen
                10 hours ago










              • As I understand the question, there are "different marbles" in the box, not equal ones.
                – Paŭlo Ebermann
                6 hours ago








              2




              2




              Re "...a question for chemistry": "The division between chemistry and physics becomes diffuse at the interface of the two branches ... crystallography ..."
              – Peter Mortensen
              10 hours ago




              Re "...a question for chemistry": "The division between chemistry and physics becomes diffuse at the interface of the two branches ... crystallography ..."
              – Peter Mortensen
              10 hours ago












              As I understand the question, there are "different marbles" in the box, not equal ones.
              – Paŭlo Ebermann
              6 hours ago




              As I understand the question, there are "different marbles" in the box, not equal ones.
              – Paŭlo Ebermann
              6 hours ago










              up vote
              1
              down vote













              You are confusing two systems. The quantum mechanical of crystalline structure of solids, and the classical marbles , even if they are supposed to be perfect spheres. There is no quantization in the classical state to "lock" a marble in a position, it is free to assume any rotational position and translational on the horizontal, so it becomes a classical statistics problem. If they are packed tight they will organize themselves into a regular structure. If there is space, a single marble on a horizontal level of marbles, (gravity organizes them at levels because of potential energy) cannot "stick" to any position without the slightest impulse sending it sliding over the lower level. There are no bound states.






              share|cite|improve this answer

















              • 1




                No, it is not really quantum mechanical. One can make crystals of colloid spheres. Opals are a natural example.
                – Pieter
                16 hours ago










              • @Pieter I note the "colloid" , is not that molecular binding levels? i.e. quantum mechanics? You can also make structures with LEGO.
                – anna v
                14 hours ago










              • @anna v no is not that molecular level but it doesn't mean that quantum the
                – Alchimista
                13 hours ago










              • Ory isn't at play. The fact is that I find all A reasonable as we are at two different levels. One is merely topological and statistical and one as in crystals including strong interaction. Apparently non binding hs are not at equipotential even in the same gravitational potential. I did ask @GiorgioP for a hint in how to see that.
                – Alchimista
                13 hours ago






              • 1




                @annav No, colloids do not involve quantum mechanics. There are repulsive Coulomb forces because the particles often have a surface charge. Together with confinement, this is probably enough to explain long-range ordering (I do not know much about colloids either).
                – Pieter
                9 hours ago















              up vote
              1
              down vote













              You are confusing two systems. The quantum mechanical of crystalline structure of solids, and the classical marbles , even if they are supposed to be perfect spheres. There is no quantization in the classical state to "lock" a marble in a position, it is free to assume any rotational position and translational on the horizontal, so it becomes a classical statistics problem. If they are packed tight they will organize themselves into a regular structure. If there is space, a single marble on a horizontal level of marbles, (gravity organizes them at levels because of potential energy) cannot "stick" to any position without the slightest impulse sending it sliding over the lower level. There are no bound states.






              share|cite|improve this answer

















              • 1




                No, it is not really quantum mechanical. One can make crystals of colloid spheres. Opals are a natural example.
                – Pieter
                16 hours ago










              • @Pieter I note the "colloid" , is not that molecular binding levels? i.e. quantum mechanics? You can also make structures with LEGO.
                – anna v
                14 hours ago










              • @anna v no is not that molecular level but it doesn't mean that quantum the
                – Alchimista
                13 hours ago










              • Ory isn't at play. The fact is that I find all A reasonable as we are at two different levels. One is merely topological and statistical and one as in crystals including strong interaction. Apparently non binding hs are not at equipotential even in the same gravitational potential. I did ask @GiorgioP for a hint in how to see that.
                – Alchimista
                13 hours ago






              • 1




                @annav No, colloids do not involve quantum mechanics. There are repulsive Coulomb forces because the particles often have a surface charge. Together with confinement, this is probably enough to explain long-range ordering (I do not know much about colloids either).
                – Pieter
                9 hours ago













              up vote
              1
              down vote










              up vote
              1
              down vote









              You are confusing two systems. The quantum mechanical of crystalline structure of solids, and the classical marbles , even if they are supposed to be perfect spheres. There is no quantization in the classical state to "lock" a marble in a position, it is free to assume any rotational position and translational on the horizontal, so it becomes a classical statistics problem. If they are packed tight they will organize themselves into a regular structure. If there is space, a single marble on a horizontal level of marbles, (gravity organizes them at levels because of potential energy) cannot "stick" to any position without the slightest impulse sending it sliding over the lower level. There are no bound states.






              share|cite|improve this answer












              You are confusing two systems. The quantum mechanical of crystalline structure of solids, and the classical marbles , even if they are supposed to be perfect spheres. There is no quantization in the classical state to "lock" a marble in a position, it is free to assume any rotational position and translational on the horizontal, so it becomes a classical statistics problem. If they are packed tight they will organize themselves into a regular structure. If there is space, a single marble on a horizontal level of marbles, (gravity organizes them at levels because of potential energy) cannot "stick" to any position without the slightest impulse sending it sliding over the lower level. There are no bound states.







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered 18 hours ago









              anna v

              155k7148442




              155k7148442








              • 1




                No, it is not really quantum mechanical. One can make crystals of colloid spheres. Opals are a natural example.
                – Pieter
                16 hours ago










              • @Pieter I note the "colloid" , is not that molecular binding levels? i.e. quantum mechanics? You can also make structures with LEGO.
                – anna v
                14 hours ago










              • @anna v no is not that molecular level but it doesn't mean that quantum the
                – Alchimista
                13 hours ago










              • Ory isn't at play. The fact is that I find all A reasonable as we are at two different levels. One is merely topological and statistical and one as in crystals including strong interaction. Apparently non binding hs are not at equipotential even in the same gravitational potential. I did ask @GiorgioP for a hint in how to see that.
                – Alchimista
                13 hours ago






              • 1




                @annav No, colloids do not involve quantum mechanics. There are repulsive Coulomb forces because the particles often have a surface charge. Together with confinement, this is probably enough to explain long-range ordering (I do not know much about colloids either).
                – Pieter
                9 hours ago














              • 1




                No, it is not really quantum mechanical. One can make crystals of colloid spheres. Opals are a natural example.
                – Pieter
                16 hours ago










              • @Pieter I note the "colloid" , is not that molecular binding levels? i.e. quantum mechanics? You can also make structures with LEGO.
                – anna v
                14 hours ago










              • @anna v no is not that molecular level but it doesn't mean that quantum the
                – Alchimista
                13 hours ago










              • Ory isn't at play. The fact is that I find all A reasonable as we are at two different levels. One is merely topological and statistical and one as in crystals including strong interaction. Apparently non binding hs are not at equipotential even in the same gravitational potential. I did ask @GiorgioP for a hint in how to see that.
                – Alchimista
                13 hours ago






              • 1




                @annav No, colloids do not involve quantum mechanics. There are repulsive Coulomb forces because the particles often have a surface charge. Together with confinement, this is probably enough to explain long-range ordering (I do not know much about colloids either).
                – Pieter
                9 hours ago








              1




              1




              No, it is not really quantum mechanical. One can make crystals of colloid spheres. Opals are a natural example.
              – Pieter
              16 hours ago




              No, it is not really quantum mechanical. One can make crystals of colloid spheres. Opals are a natural example.
              – Pieter
              16 hours ago












              @Pieter I note the "colloid" , is not that molecular binding levels? i.e. quantum mechanics? You can also make structures with LEGO.
              – anna v
              14 hours ago




              @Pieter I note the "colloid" , is not that molecular binding levels? i.e. quantum mechanics? You can also make structures with LEGO.
              – anna v
              14 hours ago












              @anna v no is not that molecular level but it doesn't mean that quantum the
              – Alchimista
              13 hours ago




              @anna v no is not that molecular level but it doesn't mean that quantum the
              – Alchimista
              13 hours ago












              Ory isn't at play. The fact is that I find all A reasonable as we are at two different levels. One is merely topological and statistical and one as in crystals including strong interaction. Apparently non binding hs are not at equipotential even in the same gravitational potential. I did ask @GiorgioP for a hint in how to see that.
              – Alchimista
              13 hours ago




              Ory isn't at play. The fact is that I find all A reasonable as we are at two different levels. One is merely topological and statistical and one as in crystals including strong interaction. Apparently non binding hs are not at equipotential even in the same gravitational potential. I did ask @GiorgioP for a hint in how to see that.
              – Alchimista
              13 hours ago




              1




              1




              @annav No, colloids do not involve quantum mechanics. There are repulsive Coulomb forces because the particles often have a surface charge. Together with confinement, this is probably enough to explain long-range ordering (I do not know much about colloids either).
              – Pieter
              9 hours ago




              @annav No, colloids do not involve quantum mechanics. There are repulsive Coulomb forces because the particles often have a surface charge. Together with confinement, this is probably enough to explain long-range ordering (I do not know much about colloids either).
              – Pieter
              9 hours ago










              up vote
              1
              down vote













              You should study annealing. Vastly oversimplifying:




              • If you cool the sample slowly enough, it retains enough energy long enough to explore its state space and find very low entropy, crystalline, states.

              • If you cool a sample rapidly, it loses energy too rapidly to explore more than a tiny neighborhood of its state space, and produces non-crystalline states.


              In your example with shaking marbles, you cool very rapidly. To simulate slow cooling, you would shake for a very long time, gradually tapering the amplitude of the shaking. Given the energy barrier to dislocation with reasonably sized marbles, you would have to taper very slowly.



              Note that shaking may not be the best way to provide energy to the system to quickly find deep valleys in the energy landscape. "Dice Become Ordered When Stirred, Not Shaken" (The article also shows that too rapid stirring prevents settling to an ordered state -- the system continues exploring nearby less ordered states.)






              share|cite|improve this answer

























                up vote
                1
                down vote













                You should study annealing. Vastly oversimplifying:




                • If you cool the sample slowly enough, it retains enough energy long enough to explore its state space and find very low entropy, crystalline, states.

                • If you cool a sample rapidly, it loses energy too rapidly to explore more than a tiny neighborhood of its state space, and produces non-crystalline states.


                In your example with shaking marbles, you cool very rapidly. To simulate slow cooling, you would shake for a very long time, gradually tapering the amplitude of the shaking. Given the energy barrier to dislocation with reasonably sized marbles, you would have to taper very slowly.



                Note that shaking may not be the best way to provide energy to the system to quickly find deep valleys in the energy landscape. "Dice Become Ordered When Stirred, Not Shaken" (The article also shows that too rapid stirring prevents settling to an ordered state -- the system continues exploring nearby less ordered states.)






                share|cite|improve this answer























                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote









                  You should study annealing. Vastly oversimplifying:




                  • If you cool the sample slowly enough, it retains enough energy long enough to explore its state space and find very low entropy, crystalline, states.

                  • If you cool a sample rapidly, it loses energy too rapidly to explore more than a tiny neighborhood of its state space, and produces non-crystalline states.


                  In your example with shaking marbles, you cool very rapidly. To simulate slow cooling, you would shake for a very long time, gradually tapering the amplitude of the shaking. Given the energy barrier to dislocation with reasonably sized marbles, you would have to taper very slowly.



                  Note that shaking may not be the best way to provide energy to the system to quickly find deep valleys in the energy landscape. "Dice Become Ordered When Stirred, Not Shaken" (The article also shows that too rapid stirring prevents settling to an ordered state -- the system continues exploring nearby less ordered states.)






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  You should study annealing. Vastly oversimplifying:




                  • If you cool the sample slowly enough, it retains enough energy long enough to explore its state space and find very low entropy, crystalline, states.

                  • If you cool a sample rapidly, it loses energy too rapidly to explore more than a tiny neighborhood of its state space, and produces non-crystalline states.


                  In your example with shaking marbles, you cool very rapidly. To simulate slow cooling, you would shake for a very long time, gradually tapering the amplitude of the shaking. Given the energy barrier to dislocation with reasonably sized marbles, you would have to taper very slowly.



                  Note that shaking may not be the best way to provide energy to the system to quickly find deep valleys in the energy landscape. "Dice Become Ordered When Stirred, Not Shaken" (The article also shows that too rapid stirring prevents settling to an ordered state -- the system continues exploring nearby less ordered states.)







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered 9 hours ago









                  Eric Towers

                  89946




                  89946






























                       

                      draft saved


                      draft discarded



















































                       


                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f443130%2fwhy-dont-marbles-naturally-arrange-themselves-like-a-crystal%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Category:香港粉麵

                      List *all* the tuples!

                      Channel [V]