Homogeneity criteria (Thermodynamics)

david.t_92
Messages
1
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


The problem is this one:

Consider a monocomponent fluid, isolated and in equilibrium,

a) Find the homogeneity criteria that must fulfill the number of microstates Ω(U,V,N).

b) If Ω(U,V,N)=exp(a*Vα*Uβ) when a>0 use the result in a to find the condition that have to fulfill α and β.

c) Find the Helmholtz energy expresion and study the stability of the system depending of α and β

I don't knok how to find the 1º part, so I cannot continue, if you Can help me, I'll be very grateful,

2. Homework Equations [/B]

S=Kb·ln(Ω) (And possible Much More)

The Attempt at a Solution



I don't have any idea on how to solve this problem, because i don't find any information in the web, but i think that probable, this homogeneity criteria means Criteria for equilibrium in statistical thermodynamics, that I find some information in the web, but this criteria only arrives that in a isoltated sistem, all the parts of the system must have the same Temperature, and I think that the problem shoud not focus in this way.

I see that possible one criteria is that Ω(λU,λV,λN)=λ*Ω(U,V,N)

A little help, can help me to solve this problem[/B]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
david.t_92 said:
i think that probable, this homogeneity criteria means Criteria for equilibrium in statistical thermodynamics
I have never hear of the term, but it is indeed reasonable that it means equilibirum. In that case, what is the relation between the number of microstates and equilibirum?
 
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