Derivation of the thermodynamic potentials using Legendre transformations

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the derivation of thermodynamic potentials using Legendre transformations, specifically how to systematically generate the enthalpy (H), Helmholtz function (F), and Gibbs function (G) from the internal energy (U). It begins with the differential form of internal energy, dU = TdS - pdV, and demonstrates the process of transforming variables to derive the potentials. The transformation involves manipulating the equations to express U + pV as enthalpy, and subsequently deriving the Helmholtz and Gibbs functions by changing the natural variables. There is some confusion about the necessity of Legendre transformations in this process, with participants questioning whether they are indeed being applied. The thread highlights the importance of understanding these transformations in the context of thermodynamics.
Andromon
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello guys, I'm studying Thermodynamics and I don't totally see how you introduce the potencials using Legendre transformations.

I have seen a non formal explanation showing how you can interpret them, but not a rigorous demonstration of how you get them via the Legendre transformations.

Do you know any site or book that covers it?

Also all the other issues, like the Maxwell transformations and the Euler equations and relations.

Ty.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I expect I'm not giving you a full picture of what a Legendre transformation is, but here's a systematic way to generate potentials, H, F and G...

Start with dU = TdS- pdV.

From the product rule: dU = TdS- {d(pV) - Vdp}

We can write this as: d{U + pV} = TdS + Vdp

U + pV is usually designated as H. It is the enthalpy potential. Its 'natural variables' are S and P.

We can product-transform TdS instead of pdV, and obtain the Helmholtz function U - TS, with natural variables T and V.

Finally we can transform both TdS and pdV,obtaining the Gibbs function G = U + pVTS, with natural variables p and T.
 
Ok, I see it, is an add and subtract trick, but I don't see where there it's used the Legendre transformation, it's not needed at all?
 
I'd be surprised to be told that I wasn't actually doing Legendre transformations in my earlier post, but let wiser heads decide.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top