I What Are the Implications of Choosing Different Paths in Entropy Calculations?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the implications of choosing different paths in entropy calculations, particularly in relation to Clausius' theorem. It highlights the confusion arising from selecting a closed cycle, such as R-P, which leads to contradictions in entropy inequalities. The key point is that irreversible processes cannot be treated the same as reversible ones, as spontaneous changes in one direction do not guarantee reversibility in the opposite direction. The conversation emphasizes the need for clarity on the restrictions when applying closed cycles in entropy calculations. Understanding these principles is crucial for accurately interpreting statistical physics concepts.
Haorong Wu
Messages
417
Reaction score
90
TL;DR Summary
Are there any restrictions of choosing circles in Clausius theorem?
Hi, I am currently reading Introduction to statistical physics by Huang. In the section of entropy, it reads

Let ##P## be an arbitrary path from ##A## to ##B##, reversible or not. Let ##R## be a reversible path with the same endpoints. Then the combined process ##P-R## is a closed cycle, and therefore by Clausius' theorem ##\int_{P-R} dQ/T \leq 0##, or
##\int_{P} \frac {dQ} {T} \leq \int_{R} \frac {dQ} {T}##.
Since the right side is the definition of the entropy difference between the final state ##B## and the initial state ##A##, we have ##S \left ( B \right ) - S \left ( A \right ) \geq \int_{A}^{B} \frac {dQ} {T}## where the equality holds if the process is reversible.

But what if I choose ##R-P## as a closed cycle? Then in a similar process, I should have ##\int_{R} \frac {dQ} {T} \leq \int_{P} \frac {dQ} {T}## and ##S \left ( B \right ) - S \left ( A \right ) \leq \int_{A}^{B} \frac {dQ} {T}##, which are contradicted to the equations above. I am not sure what goes wrong. Maybe there are some restrictions when I choose a closed cycle, but I did not find any relevant context in the book.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
In your setting you should have
\int_R \frac{dQ}{T} \leq -\int_{-P}\frac{dQ}{T} where
-\int_{-P} \frac{dQ}{T} \neq \int_{P}\frac{dQ}{T}
because P is not a reversible process.
 
anuttarasammyak said:
In your setting you should have
\int_R \frac{dQ}{T} \leq -\int_{-P}\frac{dQ}{T} where
-\int_{-P} \frac{dQ}{T} \neq \int_{P}\frac{dQ}{T}
because P is not a reversible process.

Thanks, anuttarasammyak. I understand it now.
 
Haorong Wu said:
Summary:: Are there any restrictions of choosing circles in Clausius theorem?

Hi, I am currently reading Introduction to statistical physics by Huang. In the section of entropy, it reads
But what if I choose ##R-P## as a closed cycle? Then in a similar process, I should have ##\int_{R} \frac {dQ} {T} \leq \int_{P} \frac {dQ} {T}## and ##S \left ( B \right ) - S \left ( A \right ) \leq \int_{A}^{B} \frac {dQ} {T}##, which are contradicted to the equations above. I am not sure what goes wrong. Maybe there are some restrictions when I choose a closed cycle, but I did not find any relevant context in the book.
For the irreversible paths, P can't be made the same for any opposite path and for the forward path. If it happens spontaneously for the forward path, it will not be spontaneous for the reverse path, and you can't even force it to follow the exact reverse path.
 
Chestermiller said:
For the irreversible paths, P can't be made the same for any opposite path and for the forward path. If it happens spontaneously for the forward path, it will not be spontaneous for the reverse path, and you can't even force it to follow the exact reverse path.

Thanks, Chestermiller. I just start learning statistical physics, and thanks for pointing this important point for me.
 
Consider an extremely long and perfectly calibrated scale. A car with a mass of 1000 kg is placed on it, and the scale registers this weight accurately. Now, suppose the car begins to move, reaching very high speeds. Neglecting air resistance and rolling friction, if the car attains, for example, a velocity of 500 km/h, will the scale still indicate a weight corresponding to 1000 kg, or will the measured value decrease as a result of the motion? In a second scenario, imagine a person with a...
Scalar and vector potentials in Coulomb gauge Assume Coulomb gauge so that $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A}=0.\tag{1}$$ The scalar potential ##\phi## is described by Poisson's equation $$\nabla^2 \phi = -\frac{\rho}{\varepsilon_0}\tag{2}$$ which has the instantaneous general solution given by $$\phi(\mathbf{r},t)=\frac{1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\int \frac{\rho(\mathbf{r}',t)}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}'|}d^3r'.\tag{3}$$ In Coulomb gauge the vector potential ##\mathbf{A}## is given by...
Thread 'Does Poisson's equation hold due to vector potential cancellation?'
Imagine that two charged particles, with charge ##+q##, start at the origin and then move apart symmetrically on the ##+y## and ##-y## axes due to their electrostatic repulsion. The ##y##-component of the retarded Liénard-Wiechert vector potential at a point along the ##x##-axis due to the two charges is $$ \begin{eqnarray*} A_y&=&\frac{q\,[\dot{y}]_{\mathrm{ret}}}{4\pi\varepsilon_0 c^2[(x^2+y^2)^{1/2}+y\dot{y}/c]_{\mathrm{ret}}}\tag{1}\\...
Back
Top