A second question regarding a quasistaic process

  • Thread starter Thread starter hasan_researc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Process
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the interpretation of a quasistatic process in thermodynamics, specifically regarding pressure changes and infinitesimal distances. The lecturer's use of deltaP as an average pressure change is clarified as a theoretical concept rather than a practical measurement, emphasizing the importance of average values in macro-scale pressure calculations. There is a debate about the correct formulation of work done (dW), with some arguing that the original equation incorrectly includes a variable "x" that should not be present. The distinction between infinitesimal quantities, such as deltax and dx, is also explored, with participants agreeing that both are treated similarly in theoretical contexts. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexities of understanding quasistatic processes in mathematical physics.
hasan_researc
Messages
166
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I am posting a new question regarding a quasistatic process. My lecturer writes in his lecture notes the following:

(Imagine a gas in a cylinder being compressed by a piston. Then,)
"Quasistatic compression: F = (P + deltaP)A, where deltaP is average pressure change as piston moves an infinitesimally small distance deltax
dW = F*deltax = P*A*x + A*P*deltax.

Take the limit deltax tending to dx, then ignore 2nd term (2nd order of smallness), and using : Adx = dV
dW = P dV."

These are my questions:

1) My lecturer writes that deltaP is the average pressure change. Does he mean that after measuring the changes in pressure from many infinitesimal changes in the distance, he used all the data to arrive at the average pressure change?

2) The distance deltax is infinitesimally small, yet he takes the limit dW as deltax tends to x. This is surprising because deltax itself is an infinitesimal quantity. Or does he mean infinitesimal in this context just to mean a very small amount and not the proper definition as used in calculus. Is dx an infinitesimal distance anyway?

3) We are ignoring the second term because of its smallness. BUT, in a strictly mathematical sense, is the product of two infinitesimally small quantities equal to zero?

I have begun my undergrad course last year and still after one year of mathematical physics, I don't understand what the answers to these questions should be.

Please help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1/ I think practically we can understand deltaP that way. But mathematically, not really. And I think what the lecturer said is more about theoretical reasoning than measuring in practice.
Theoretically, there is possibility that in dt, only 1 particle collides with the piston, but there is possibility that there are 1000 particles or so in the collision. But pressure is a quantity of macro scale. Therefore, when considering the collision, we use neither the number 1 nor 1000, we use the AVERAGE number instead. This average number of particles coming to collide in dt can be found theoretically.

dW = F*deltax = P*A*x + A*P*deltax.

I think it's wrong. It should be:
dW = F.deltax = (P + deltaP)A.deltax = PA.deltax + A.deltaP.deltax.
So there is no "x" here :smile: And both deltax and dx are infinitesimal amount.

3/ Yes. For example:
P=ab
P + \Delta P = (a+\Delta a)*(b+\Delta b) = P + a\Delta b + b\Delta a + \Delta a\Delta b
Thus:
\Delta P = a\Delta b + b\Delta a + \Delta a\Delta b (1).
\Delta P/\Delta a = a.(\Delta b/\Delta a) + b + \Delta b
For \Delta a \rightarrow 0 and \Delta b \rightarrow 0:
dP/da = lim(\Delta P/\Delta a) = lim (a.(\Delta b/\Delta a) + b + \Delta b) = a.(db/da)+b
And so: dP = adb+bda

Again, this is theoretical reasoning, so \Delta x is unmeasurable. It and dx are simply the same. This is why we can omit the term dP.dx.

Just my 2 cents :smile:
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top