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.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Thread 'A scenario of non-uniform circular motion'
(All the needed diagrams are posted below) My friend came up with the following scenario. Imagine a fixed point and a perfectly rigid rod of a certain length extending radially outwards from this fixed point(it is attached to the fixed point). To the free end of the fixed rod, an object is present and it is capable of changing it's speed(by thruster say or any convenient method. And ignore any resistance). It starts with a certain speed but say it's speed continuously increases as it goes...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Back
Top