The Journal of Physical Chem/stry, Vol. 87, No. 22, 1983 4553
Additions and Corrections
“C) and low concentrations (550 mM). Increasing the temperature and/or the concentration is associated with considerable changes in the observed parameters. That self-diffusion coefficients do not exhibit anomalous behavior near critical points has been shown experimentally There is at for low molecular weight present no direct evidence that this is also so in macromolecular solutions. Apparent self-diffusion coefficients have been derived by combining mutual diffusion and osmotic pressure data and no anomalies observed*% near critical conditions. However, the arguments used when evaluating “apparent” self-diffusion coefficients are now known to be i n ~ a l i d . ~ Experimental ~-~~ self-diffusion coefficients however, may be used to deduce information on micellar size and shape and on intermicellar interactions. The NMR self-diffusion coefficients observed here, therefore, provide clear evidence for a growth of CIZEB micelles on increasing the temperature toward the cloud point. The inferred growth of C12E6micelles on increasing the temperature agrees with several studies (cf. above) on various poly(ethy1ene oxide) alkyl ethers. On increasing the temperature there is a clear but slow dehydration of these nonionic surfactant micelles as evidenced by water self-diffusionstudies.31 Mitchell et al.rr and N h n et al.,% (28)H. Hamann, C. Hoheisel, and H. Richtering, Ber. Bunaenges. Phys. Chem., 76, 249 (1972). (29)J. C . Allegra, A. Stein, and G. F. Allen, J. Chem. Phys., 56,1716 (1971). (30)J. E. Anderson and W. H.Gerritz, J.Chem. Phys., 53,2584 (1970). (31)J. C. Lang, Jr., and J. H. Freed, J. Chem. Phys., 56,4103(1972). (32)K. Krynicki, S. N. Changdar, and J. G. Powles, Mol. Phys., 39, 773 (1980). (33)R. Bergman and L.-0. SundelBf, Eur. Polym. J., 13,881(1977). (34)J. Roots,B. Nystrijm, L.-0. Sundebf, and B. Porsch, Polymer, 20, 337 (1979). (35)L.-0. SundelBf, Ber. Bunaenges. Phys. Chem., 83, 329 (1979). (36)P.-G. Nilsson and B. Lindman, J.Phys. Chem., in press.
in considering aggregation of C,E, in mixtures with water in general, i.e., in both isotropic and anisotropic solutions, have discussed the relationship between micellar shape and the temperature stability of liquid crystalline phases. These authors also find it possible to rationalize general features of micellar growth and of the phase diagrams from simple considerations based on the sizes of the polar and nonpolar parts. The present results cannot directly distinguish between different types of micellar growth. In recent neutron scattering studies, Cebula and 0ttewilPs find support for cylindrical micelles rather than disk micelles whereas Triolo et al.39conclude that their SANS data are best interpreted by the presence of spherical micelles at all temperatures (in the range 14-47 “C). A study3B of water self-diffusion gives an observed obstruction effect which seems inconsistent with large oblate micelles and, therefore, gives good support for prolate or cylindrical micelles. A combined surfactant lH NMR relaxation and self-diffusion study% indicates that surfactant chain and micelle flexibility is much larger than for typical micelles such as those encountered at lower temperatures. Acknowledgment. This work was supported in part by the Swedish Forest Products Research Institute, Stockholm, and in part by the Swedish National Science Research Council. This is gratefully acknowledged. Thanks are due to Stefan Knight and Mikael Jawson for assistance with the light scattering measurements. We also thank Dr. N. Mazer for valuable suggestions on this work. Registry No. CIZEB, 3055-96-7. (37)D.J. Mitchell, G. J. T. Tiddy, L. Waring, T. Bostock, and M. P. McDonald, J. Chem. SOC.,Faraday Trans. 1,79, 975 (1983). (38)D. J. Cebula and R. H. Ottewill, Colloid Polym. Sci., 260, 1118 (1982). (39)R. Triolo, L. J. Magid, J. S.Johnson, Jr., and H. R. Child, J. Phys. Chem., 86, 3689 (1982).
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS 1979, Volume 83 Bruce C. Garrett and Donald G. Truhlar*: Generalized Transition State Theory. Classical Mechanical Theory and Applications to Collinear Reactions of Hydrogen Molecules.
Page 1052-1079 and 3058. In eq 47, p x should be pr. In eq 120 and 129, + should be -. Section VD, line 8: model should be mode. Section VIF, line 1 6 + should be =. In Table 111,kCCVT(1500 K, D)should be 2.32 X lo4 (4.0). In Table IV, kCCVT(lOOO K, D)should be 4.46 X lo3 (14). In Table VI, kc(4000 K, D)should be 3.26 X lo3 (8).
Bruce C. Garrett and Donald G. Truhlar*: Generalized Transition State Theory. Quantum Effects for Collinear Reactions of Hydrogen Molecules.
Pages 1079-1112. In Table XVIII, kUS(T= 600 K) should be 4.17 (2). In our original erratum (Volume 84, pp 682-6) Tables XXIIIE-XXVE were left out. They are included here.
TABLE XXiIIE: Canonical Rate Constants for C1 + HD ClH + D T,K lCVE CVT/CVE NVT/CVE MEPVA --f
*
200 300 400 600 1000 1500
2.48 (1) 2.24 ( 2 ) 6.67 ( 2 ) 3.65 ( 3 ) 1.59 ( 4 ) 4.06 ( 4 )
4.77 7.43 (1) 3.52 ( 2 ) 1.95 (3) 9.33 (3) 2.36 ( 4 )
4.76 7 . 4 2 (1) 3.51 ( 2 ) 1.94 ( 3 ) 9.13 (3) 2.26 ( 4 )
1.25 4.00 (1) 2.44 ( 2 ) 1.62 ( 3 ) 8.41 ( 3 ) 2.14 ( 4 )
MCPVA 1.72 4.89 (1) 2.82 ( 2 ) 1.77 ( 3 ) 8.84 (3) 2.20 ( 4 )
QUSIMEP 1.25 3.97 (1) 2.38 ( 2 ) 1.52 ( 3 ) 7.34 ( 3 ) 1.73 (4)
QUS/MCP 1.72 4.85 2.76 1.68 7.77 1.80
(1) (2) (3) (3) (4)
