Gibbs Energy: Understanding A=G+hM

  • Thread starter Thread starter KFC
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Gibbs
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between Helmholtz energy (A), Gibbs energy (G), and magnetization (M) in magnetic systems, expressed as A = G + hM. Clarification is sought on the term hM and its implications for calculating Helmholtz energy when magnetization is considered. It is emphasized that magnetization is often overlooked in thermodynamics, leading to inconsistencies in energy equations. The conversation highlights the importance of using the Legendre transform to derive relevant potentials while keeping temperature, pressure, and magnetic field constant. Overall, the discussion underscores the complexity of thermodynamic potentials in systems involving magnetization.
KFC
Messages
477
Reaction score
4
In a book about stat. mech., I read the following relaiton for magnetic system

A = G + hM

where A is the Helmholtz energy, G is the Gibbs energy and h is the external magnetic field, M is the magetization. I know from thermodynamic, we have

A = U - TS

or

A = G - PV

so, hM = -PV ?

I don't understand what is hM. If I know magnetization, external field and Gibbs energy, how to get Helmholtz energy?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This goes back to that issue I believe you mentioned earlier: magnetization is usually ignored in thermodynamics, so authors can be inconsistent when adding the relevant terms. When we're including magnetization in an open system, energy is

U=TS-PV+\mu N+hM

The relevant potential when temperature, pressure, and field are kept constant is acquired by the Legendre transform

\Phi=U-TS+PV-hM

Some authors may call \Phi the Gibbs energy, which risks great confusion. (I'm using the symbol \Phi as a dummy variable here.)

To figure out the potentials, just remember that you need to remove (by Legendre transform) any conjugate pairs associated with constant variables. Don't rely on the consistency of names like Helmholtz, Gibbs, etc. If someone's working with a system at constant temperature and field, for example, you know you need to consider the potential

\Lambda=U-TS-mH

whatever it might be called. (Again, \Lambda is just a dummy variable.) I hope it's helpful to see the method to constructing these potentials. Does this make sense?

(To reiterate, it's definitely not true that hM=-PV.)
 
Back
Top