I Helmholtz Free Energy: Why is F Minimized?

AI Thread Summary
The Helmholtz free energy (F) is minimized at constant temperature (T) and volume (V) at equilibrium, particularly in a closed system where no mass transfer occurs (dN=0). At equilibrium, all parameters, including pressure (p), volume (V), and temperature (T), remain constant, leading to a stable state where the system cannot change further. While F may appear constant, it is essential to consider the conditions under which it is minimized, including the behavior of the system as it evolves towards equilibrium. The minimization of F is linked to the maximization of entropy (S) and the stability of the system. Therefore, understanding the second derivative of F is crucial to confirm that it is indeed at a minimum.
Silviu
Messages
612
Reaction score
11
Hello! I read that the Helmholtz free energy is minimized at constant T and V at equilibrium. But I am not sure I understand why. So starting from ##F=U-TS## I got ##dF = \mu dN - pdV -SdT##. So at constant V and T we have ##dF = \mu dN##. Now I am not sure how does this implies that F is minimized and minimized with respect to what? Can someone tell me why is F minimized? Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the statement you are referring to is missing to say that it is for a closed system, that is, there's not mass transferring (so ##dN=0##).
 
Mr rabbit said:
I think the statement you are referring to is missing to say that it is for a closed system, that is, there's not mass transferring (so ##dN=0##).
Thank you for the reply. However, if T, V and N (and hence p) are constant, then nothing changes in the system. Doesn't that means that F is constant, so it doesn't make sense to talk about a minimum? (Also, the context in which I read this is about chemical reactions, so dN changes i assume.)
 
It is assumed (and can be proved) that all parameters are constant at equilibrium. Think, for example, on an expansive system, so you take ##U=U (S, V, N)##; If you "drop" the system from an arbitrary state, always evolves to another state (equilibrium state) until the energy U is minimal and the entropy S is maximal. All parameters evolves too (p, V, T ...) and when the system reaches equilibrium state you get ##p=const ## (mechanical equilibrium), ##T=const## (thermal equilibrium), ##N=const## (chemical equilibrium).

Helmholtz free energy is the internal energy U but depending on temperature instead of entropy.
 
##F## being constant is only one prerequisite to be a minimum; you also need to show that the second derivative is less than zero.
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top