Heat & Movement: Frame of Reference & Kinetic Energy

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter rich tea
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Heat Movement
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between heat, kinetic energy, and the frame of reference in the context of air movement, such as from a fan or wind. Participants explore how the motion of air affects its temperature and the implications of different frames of reference when calculating kinetic energy.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that if air is moving, its temperature should increase due to the increase in total kinetic energy of the particles.
  • Another participant agrees that a frame of reference with zero momentum is used to calculate the total kinetic energy of air particles.
  • A different viewpoint indicates that while heat energy is related to the kinetic energy of molecules, increased wind speed leads to more random motion, which complicates the relationship between temperature and kinetic energy.
  • One participant asserts that temperature is a measure of average kinetic energy in a zero momentum frame, arguing that temperature is not frame dependent.
  • It is mentioned that the macroscopic kinetic energy of moving air becomes random kinetic energy after collisions, which can lead to an increase in temperature, but this is contingent on the interactions with other air molecules and surfaces.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between air movement and temperature, with some asserting that temperature does not increase with air movement while others suggest a more complex interaction. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of kinetic energy and temperature in moving air.

Contextual Notes

There are assumptions about the definitions of temperature and kinetic energy that are not fully explored, and the discussion does not clarify the conditions under which the proposed relationships hold true.

rich tea
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
hello, my first post here, I'm training as a physics teacher and my physics is quite rusty, it's been a good few years since university, i was thinking about heat (of air for example) being the kinetic energy of the particles and then i thought if that was the case wouldn't a mass of air with a certain temperature increase in temperature if it started to 'move' for whatever reason (wind, a fan...) as the total kinetic energy of that air would increase.

Does this have anything to do with the frame of reference you use to calculate the air particles' total Kinetic energy, do you use some kind of internal frame of reference?

Or have i completely confused myself?

this is bugging me, hope someone can help
 
Science news on Phys.org
rich tea said:
Does this have anything to do with the frame of reference you use to calculate the air particles' total Kinetic energy, do you use some kind of internal frame of reference?
Exactly. You'd use a frame in which the momentum is zero.
 
Actually it is not all that straight.Yes, the heat energy is due to increase in the K.E of the molecules present in the air. Actually when the wind speed is normal , the molecules are randomly striking the walla of the room , remember the kinetic energy is still present , and when wind/speed increases, the motion becoms more random , the more random and tedious motion , more the probability that the momentum's carried by th emolecules keeo on cancelling on striking the walls and against other equally sized molecules.Therefore we feel comfortable under fan.
 
rich tea said:
... wouldn't a mass of air with a certain temperature increase in temperature if it started to 'move' for whatever reason (wind, a fan...) as the total kinetic energy of that air would increase.
Just to be clear, the answer to that is no. Temperature is a measure of the average KE of the molecules in a frame in which the momentum is zero. Otherwise, temperature would be frame dependent.

Of course, the macroscopic KE of the air imparted by the fan soon becomes random KE and an increase in temperature, but that's only after the moving air is slowed down by collision with other air molecules in the room and with walls, etc. (We feel comfortable under a fan because the moving air helps evaporate moisture on the skin, thus cooling us off. But having a fan on will increase the temperature of the room.)
 
thanks doc al, i suspected it could be this something like this, so you could kind of say temperature is measure of the mayhem going on around you when you're sat in the middle of things
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
21K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K