Deriving heat capacity using thermodynamics identity

ultimateguy
Messages
122
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Use the thermodynamic identity to derive the heat capacity formula C_V=T\frac{\partial{S}}{\partial{T}}_V

Homework Equations


C_V=\frac{\partial{U}}{\partial{T}}
T=\frac{\partial{U}}{\partial{S}}
dU=TdS-PdV+\mudN

The Attempt at a Solution



I used C_V=\frac{\partial{U}}{\partial{S}}\frac{\partial{S}}{\partial{T}}=T\frac{\partial{S}}{\partial{T}}_V=\frac{\partial{U}}{\partial{T}}=C_V.
This is the only solution I can think of, but I don't think I used the thermodynamics identity, did I?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
There are a distinct lack of thermal physicists on this website and with good reason as it is one of the most boring subjects ever. I think if you know that:

dS=(\frac{\partial{S}}{\partial{U}})_{PV}dU

Then you can substitute the following into the equation for dU,

dU=(\frac{\partial{U}}{\partial{T}})_VdT

and have a fiddle about, that should set you off on the right lines.
 
Last edited:
This may be a dumb question, but what's the difference between E and U?
 
ultimateguy said:
This may be a dumb question, but what's the difference between E and U?

There is none. I apologise. I normally write E and I was trying to conform to your notation but obviously forgot half way through I will change it.
 
The solution provided by the OP is correct.

Daniel.
 
I'd have thought if they wanted a derivation from the thermodynamic identity then they'd want you to start from that. However the OP proof might be accepted.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top