Maximum Work Theorem : Herbert Callen

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the Maximum Work Theorem as presented in Herbert Callen's "Thermodynamics." Participants explore the necessity of a reversible heat source in the theorem's context, questioning whether the conditions outlined by Callen are essential for proving the theorem. The conversation includes interpretations of thermodynamic principles and comparisons with alternative texts.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the requirement for a reversible heat source, suggesting that constant volume and mole numbers should suffice for the theorem's proof.
  • Another participant expresses confusion about the overall argument, indicating a lack of clarity in the concepts presented.
  • A third participant reiterates their confusion and notes that there are multiple reversible paths between two thermodynamic states that do not yield the same work and heat, challenging the assumptions made by Callen.
  • A suggestion is made to consider an alternative textbook, "Fundamentals of Engineering Thermodynamics" by Moran et al., as potentially clearer than Callen's work.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not appear to reach a consensus. There are competing views regarding the necessity of a reversible heat source and the clarity of Callen's arguments.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the completeness of the original question and the implications of the Maximum Work Theorem. There are indications of differing interpretations of thermodynamic principles and the role of reversible processes.

mayank pathak
Messages
8
Reaction score
2
Hi, I have been studying thermodynamics from Herbert Callen's "Thermodynamics : an introduction to the physical theories of equilibrium thermostatics and irreversible thermodynamics"
In Chapter 4, Section 4.4, he writes : "
all processes occurring between a given initial and a given final state of a system, the flux of heat to an associated reversible heat source is minimum and the flux of work to an associated reversible work source is maximum for reversible processes."

Now he also describes what a reversible heat source is : "
A reversible heat source is defined as a system enclosed by a rigid
impermeable wall and characterized by relaxation times sufficiently short
that all processes of interest within it are essentially quasi-static."

I understand his argument. But I fail to understand why is the heat source required to be reversible ? According to me, as long as the heat source(or sink) is constrained to have constant volume and constant mole numbers, same heat input will lead to same rise in internal energy and hence same increase in entropy in accordance with the fundamental equation of the heat source. And that is all that we need to prove maximum work theorem. And we don't actually need the heat source to be reversible.

Am I missing something ?

Edit : I have uploaded the relevant text from the book.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot from 2018-12-18 01-52-55.png
    Screenshot from 2018-12-18 01-52-55.png
    39.8 KB · Views: 560
  • Screenshot from 2018-12-18 01-53-13.png
    Screenshot from 2018-12-18 01-53-13.png
    30.1 KB · Views: 552
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
For what it is worth, none of it makes any sense to me.
 
Chestermiller said:
For what it is worth, none of it makes any sense to me.

does my question sound incomplete ? Let me share some pages from the book to make it easy for others.
 
None of it makes any sense to me. It is well known that, for two specified thermodynamic equilibrium states of a closed system, there are an infinite number of reversible paths, and they don't all involve the same work and heat.

As an alternate to Callen, might I suggest Fundamentals of Engineering Thermodynamics by Moran et al. I think you will find it much easier to understand.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K