How deep does thermodynamics go? And how much would a chemist know?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the accessibility of non-equilibrium thermodynamics research for chemistry majors. Participants assert that chemists and chemical engineers often possess a strong understanding of thermodynamics, potentially more so than physicists. The conversation highlights the importance of self-study and interdisciplinary approaches, suggesting that chemistry students can engage with non-equilibrium systems without formal physics training. Additionally, it emphasizes the value of direct communication with research groups to gain insights and guidance on relevant coursework.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of classical thermodynamics principles
  • Familiarity with chemical kinetics
  • Basic knowledge of statistical mechanics
  • Competency in relevant mathematics for physical chemistry
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore non-equilibrium thermodynamics applications in chemical kinetics
  • Study statistical mechanics to understand its role in thermodynamics
  • Engage with research groups focused on non-equilibrium systems
  • Investigate interdisciplinary courses in materials science and engineering
USEFUL FOR

Chemistry majors, aspiring researchers in thermodynamics, and students interested in interdisciplinary studies between chemistry and physics.

somefellasomewhere
Messages
10
Reaction score
1
TL;DR Summary: I'm trying to understand what research fields I would have access to as a person who's majoring in chemistry. So how deep does thermodynamics go and how much of a foothold could I get into research on it as someone who's majoring in chemistry? Or is it really only accessible to physics majors? (non-equilibrium thermo, don't know if that makes a difference) I ask because there is a research group on non-equilibrium systems at the college I'm attending.

I'm trying to understand what research fields I would have access to as a person who's majoring in chemistry, and non-equilibrium thermodynamics has caught my attention since some professors at my college are doing research on it. I'm not at all educated on the topic, but it seems to have interesting applications in chemical kinetics and biology and I'm wondering if I would have access to the field as someone majoring in chemistry?

Thermodynamics seems to be an bottomless well of knowledge, so would this field be more favorable towards people trained in physics? Or would my pchem classes allow me a foothold in this area of research?

Also, what does the landscape of thermodynamics as a subject look like? I know there is some pretty set in stone classical understandings of the field, but statistical mechanics (whatever that is, again very clueless here) and this non-linear/non-equilibrium thermodynamics seems to present a new frontier of knowledge. Is that correct? Specifically in regards to non-equilibrium thermodynamics, do these systems present themselves more often in applications of thermodynamics (and would it follow that someone could get a foothold without formal training in physics?), or is it a central idea in and of itself?

Sorry if this is incoherent nonsense, or founded on naivety, but I'm trying to understand what career/academic options I have.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
Physics news on Phys.org
somefellasomewhere said:
I ask because there is a research group on non-equilibrium systems at the college I'm attending.
You should ask them, possibly in person. Not only will you get good advice, but it'll also put you on their radar as someone who's interested and asks good questions. In general, things are more fluid (pun intended) at the research level; many researchers self study their way to competency in fields which they didn't major in.
 
Some argue that chemists/chemical engineers have a better understanding of thermodynamics than physicists.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and symbolipoint
Frabjous said:
Some argue that chemists/chemical engineers have a better understanding of thermodynamics than physicists.
..., plus or minus sign conventions regarding positive/negative work.
 
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Bystander said:
..., plus or minus sign conventions regarding positive/negative work.
Even within physics, major texts use different conventions for this.
 
Muu9 said:
You should ask them, possibly in person. Not only will you get good advice, but it'll also put you on their radar as someone who's interested and asks good questions. In general, things are more fluid (pun intended) at the research level; many researchers self study their way to competency in fields which they didn't major in.
I will do this, but I don't want to seem arrogant or imposing. I might wait before I've had at least some prerequisite math and science before I go about pretending I can understand their field.
 
somefellasomewhere said:
I will do this, but I don't want to seem arrogant or imposing. I might wait before I've had at least some prerequisite math and science before I go about pretending I can understand their field.
Why wait? Ask them for suggestions on the math and science courses you should be taking. FWIW, I majored in physics, both as an undergrad and grad. In addition to the thermodynamics and statistical mechanics classes in the physics department, I also took thermodynamics classes (undergrad and grad) in the materials science and engineering department. Coincidentally, the classes in the materials science and engineering departments (different schools for undergrad and grad) were taught by professors with chemistry degrees.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and berkeman

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
557
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K