Feynman Lectures and the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics

AI Thread Summary
Feynman discusses the assumption of thermal equilibrium in the context of deriving the ideal gas law, noting that proving this assumption from Newton's laws is complex and better approached through quantum mechanics. The discussion identifies this assumption as related to the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics, which establishes that systems in thermal equilibrium share a common temperature. The proof involves linking macroscopic thermodynamic variables to microscopic behaviors, making it intricate due to the need for advanced mechanics. Participants express interest in the connection between the Zeroth Law and the equipartition theorem, as well as the specific challenges in proving the law using classical mechanics. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexities of thermodynamic principles and their foundational proofs.
lugita15
Messages
1,553
Reaction score
15
In Volume 1 of the Feynman Lectures on Physics, Feynman derives the ideal gas law from Newton's laws of motion. But then on page 41-1, he puts a caveat to the derivation he has just completed: "We have perpetually been making a certain important assumption, which is that if a given system is in thermal equilibrium at a given temperature, it will also be in equilibrium with anything else at the same temperature ... This proposition is true and can be proven from the laws of mechanics, but the proof is very complicated and can be established only by using advanced mechanics. It is much easier to prove in quantum mechanics than it is in classical mechanics. It was proved first by Boltzmann, but for now we simply take it to be true."

Does anyone know what Feynman is talking about? Is he referring to the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics? Can it be proved using Newton's laws of motion, and is the proof really complicated? Where can I find this proof?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thank You in Advance.
 
Science news on Phys.org
I've done some reading about Boltzmann, and I'm thinking that this may have something to do with the equipartition theorem. Is the equipartition theorem in any way connected to the zeroth law?
 
I think you have it right - its the zeroth law of thermodynamics.

The proof of the zeroth law is complicated - because it involves showing that there is a function of the (macroscopic) thermodynamic variables which can be used to define equilibrium (this function is the temperature) starting from microscopic variables (for instance the positions and momenta of all the molecules making up a gas).
 
ogion said:
I think you have it right - its the zeroth law of thermodynamics.

The proof of the zeroth law is complicated - because it involves showing that there is a function of the (macroscopic) thermodynamic variables which can be used to define equilibrium (this function is the temperature) starting from microscopic variables (for instance the positions and momenta of all the molecules making up a gas).
Where can I find this proof of the zeroth law from Newton's laws? Why does it require "advanced mechanics" (which I assume refers to Lagrangians and Hamiltonians) and why is it easier if you start from quantum mechanics instead?
 
I need to calculate the amount of water condensed from a DX cooling coil per hour given the size of the expansion coil (the total condensing surface area), the incoming air temperature, the amount of air flow from the fan, the BTU capacity of the compressor and the incoming air humidity. There are lots of condenser calculators around but they all need the air flow and incoming and outgoing humidity and then give a total volume of condensed water but I need more than that. The size of the...
Thread 'Why work is PdV and not (P+dP)dV in an isothermal process?'
Let's say we have a cylinder of volume V1 with a frictionless movable piston and some gas trapped inside with pressure P1 and temperature T1. On top of the piston lay some small pebbles that add weight and essentially create the pressure P1. Also the system is inside a reservoir of water that keeps its temperature constant at T1. The system is in equilibrium at V1, P1, T1. Now let's say i put another very small pebble on top of the piston (0,00001kg) and after some seconds the system...
I was watching a Khan Academy video on entropy called: Reconciling thermodynamic and state definitions of entropy. So in the video it says: Let's say I have a container. And in that container, I have gas particles and they're bouncing around like gas particles tend to do, creating some pressure on the container of a certain volume. And let's say I have n particles. Now, each of these particles could be in x different states. Now, if each of them can be in x different states, how many total...

Similar threads

Back
Top