Schroeder on thermodynamical reversibility, entropy and quasi-static equilibrium

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of quasi-static processes in thermodynamics, particularly the relationship between heat transfer (Q), work (W), and entropy (S). It highlights a contradiction in understanding quasi-static processes, where Q = TdS is often associated with reversibility, yet examples of irreversible quasi-static processes exist. The adiabatic expansion of gas into a vacuum is debated as a quasi-static process, questioning its classification due to the conditions of work and heat transfer. Additionally, there is mention of differing definitions of "quasi-static," suggesting that some interpretations allow for local equilibrium rather than strict adherence to the concept of infinitesimal closeness to equilibrium. The conversation concludes with a recommendation for further reading on axiomatic thermodynamics, emphasizing the importance of foundational understanding before delving into statistical treatments.
nonequilibrium
Messages
1,412
Reaction score
2
Hello,

In "An Introduction to Thermal Physics" Schroeder goes to deduce that for any quasi-static process: W = -PdV (p.21), and then on page 112, with the help of dE = Q + W (= first law of Td.) and dE = TdS - PdV (= the Td. identity), he deduces that Q = TdS for ALL quasi-static processes (reversibility is not a prerequisite).

In class we saw that Q = TdS implies reversibility, but I assume this is wrong, then, because Q = TdS already follows out of "regular" happening quasi-statically and on p.82 Schroeder notes: "A quasistatic process can still be irreversible, however, if there is also heat flowing in or out or if entropy is being created in some other way."

What is an example, then, of a quasistatic, irreversible process? My professor argumented you could let the free (adiabatic) expansion of a gas (i.e. letting a gas freely expand into vacuum in an isolated container (from e.g. half the container volume), so Q = 0 and dE = 0 and W = 0 [see incl. picture for clarity]) happen quasistatically by building brick wall after brick wall (seperating the gas from the vacuum), pulling away each wall after another, letting the gas expand infinitesimally further each go. According to Schroeder, however, this is clearly not quasistatic since W (= 0) does not equal PdV (clearly not zero). Furthermore, if it were quasistatic, then Q = TdS and since Q = 0, the adiabatic expansion would be reversible.

attachment.php?attachmentid=24875&stc=1&d=1270413130.jpg


On wikipedia it gave the following example of an irreversible, quasistatic process:

An example of a quasistatic process that is not reversible is the slow heat exchange between two bodies at two finitely different temperatures, where the heat exchange rate is controlled by an approximately adiabatic partition between the two bodies (Sears and Salinger, 1986) — in this case, no matter how slowly the process takes place, the states of the two bodies are never infinitesimally close to equilibrium, since thermal equilibrium requires that the two bodies be at precisely the same temperature

But I must say I don't quite get it, because earlier on the page it defines quasistatic as "the system will go through a sequence of states that are infinitesimally close to equilibrium (so the system remains in quasistatic equilibrium)", while in the example it argues that it cannot be infinitesimally close to equilibrium... If indeed the example itself is a good one, then what is a better definition of quasistatic? (so you don't get a contradiction...)

So what is the deal? AKA what is an irreversible, quasistatic process (so where Q = TdSsystem yet dSuniverse > 0)

Thank you,
mr. vodka
 

Attachments

  • thermodynamics.jpg
    thermodynamics.jpg
    4 KB · Views: 752
Science news on Phys.org
I had a look at "H. A. Buchdahl, The concepts of classical thermodynamics, cambridge u p, 1966" which has been re-edited in 2009. It is a very careful book on axiomatic thermodynamics. Buchdahl shows, that every quasi-static process is reversible.
However, I think that different people use different notions of "quasi-static", e.g. in the sense that the system is only locally in equilibrium; for the latter definitions, this may not hold.
 
Hm, interesting. Would you recommend me to buy the book? An axiomatic treatment of the subject seems VERY appealing, but the thing stopping me is that it purely looks at classical thermodynamics, while I believe the statistical treatment is essential for a grasp of the material.

Could you possibly look how the book defines "quasi-static"? Its result that it automatically implies reversibility, is very interesting.
 
Personally, I think that you have to understand first phenomenological thermodynamics to appreciate statistical thermodynamics. The book by Buchdahl is nevertheless a textbook and doesn't get lost in formalism. So it is probably a good buy. But maybe you can find it in the library?
 
Ah yes, it is there, thanks :)
 
I need to calculate the amount of water condensed from a DX cooling coil per hour given the size of the expansion coil (the total condensing surface area), the incoming air temperature, the amount of air flow from the fan, the BTU capacity of the compressor and the incoming air humidity. There are lots of condenser calculators around but they all need the air flow and incoming and outgoing humidity and then give a total volume of condensed water but I need more than that. The size of the...
Thread 'Why work is PdV and not (P+dP)dV in an isothermal process?'
Let's say we have a cylinder of volume V1 with a frictionless movable piston and some gas trapped inside with pressure P1 and temperature T1. On top of the piston lay some small pebbles that add weight and essentially create the pressure P1. Also the system is inside a reservoir of water that keeps its temperature constant at T1. The system is in equilibrium at V1, P1, T1. Now let's say i put another very small pebble on top of the piston (0,00001kg) and after some seconds the system...
Back
Top