How Are Energy and Work Interconnected in Thermodynamics?

AI Thread Summary
Energy is defined as the capacity to do work, but the definition of work varies based on the theoretical framework used. In Newtonian mechanics, work is defined as the product of force and distance (f.d), while in thermodynamics, work is characterized as the transfer of energy excluding heat. The distinction lies in that heat represents a disorganized transfer of energy, whereas work involves organized transfers through fields and forces. Understanding these definitions clarifies the interconnectedness of energy and work in different contexts. This nuanced understanding is essential for grasping thermodynamic principles.
hwall95
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Okay i know that energy is the ability or capacity to do work. But how do you define work, as like the isn't work just the transference of energy in one form to another? Which is kinda circular reasoning. Like the rely on each other for a defintion. Is that right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The appropriate definition of work depends on what theory you are using.

One is the mechanical definition: "work is f.d". This definition is used in basic Newtonian mechanics. In it forces are the primary things and everything else is defined based on forces. Then energy is non-circularly defined as the capacity to do work.

The other is the thermodynamic definition: "work is a transfer of energy other than through heat". This definition is used in Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics as well as all field theories. In these, the Lagrangian is the primary thing and everything else is defined based on the Lagrangian. Then energy is non-circularly defined as the conserved quantity associated with time invariance of the Lagrangian.
 
hwall95 said:
Okay i know that energy is the ability or capacity to do work. But how do you define work, as like the isn't work just the transference of energy in one form to another? Which is kinda circular reasoning. Like the rely on each other for a defintion. Is that right?

You may want to bookmark the Hyperphysics website and use it as a starting point for future querries.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/wcon.html

Zz.
 
DaleSpam said:
The appropriate definition of work depends on what theory you are using.

One is the mechanical definition: "work is f.d". This definition is used in basic Newtonian mechanics. In it forces are the primary things and everything else is defined based on forces. Then energy is non-circularly defined as the capacity to do work.

The other is the thermodynamic definition: "work is a transfer of energy other than through heat". This definition is used in Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics as well as all field theories. In these, the Lagrangian is the primary thing and everything else is defined based on the Lagrangian. Then energy is non-circularly defined as the conserved quantity associated with time invariance of the Lagrangian.

hahah yeah thanks i was meaning the thermodynamics definition sorry, okay thanks but when you say "other then heat energy", is that because thermal energy itself is just kinetic energy?
 
hwall95 said:
hahah yeah thanks i was meaning the thermodynamics definition sorry, okay thanks but when you say "other then heat energy", is that because thermal energy itself is just kinetic energy?
No, that is just the definition of work in thermodynamics. Energy can be transferred between systems either through heat, or through anything else. Anything else is called work.

The basic distinction is that heat is a rather disorganized microscopic transfer that you cannot see in detail, as opposed to things like macroscopic fields and forces.
 
DaleSpam said:
No, that is just the definition of work in thermodynamics. Energy can be transferred between systems either through heat, or through anything else. Anything else is called work.

The basic distinction is that heat is a rather disorganized microscopic transfer that you cannot see in detail, as opposed to things like macroscopic fields and forces.

ohhh okay thanks i understand that now, thanks heaps :)
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top