加载中…
In manuscript arXiv:1703.08719 [cond-mat.soft], it was claimed that the well-known deduction of Tolman’s law is not rigorous, since Tolman’s argument implies that two different definitions of the surface tension, called and in the manuscript, coincide. This claim is retracted as it can be shown by free-energy minimization that indeed holds for the Laplace radius. Joachim Gro\ss, Philipp Rehner, Carlos Vega, \O{}ivind Wilhelmsen, and the anonymous reviewers of The Journal of Chemical Physics contributed to finding the mistake in the manuscript.

生成讲解博客的中文版本

生成AI智能校验的中文版本