Thermodynamic constant -- misunderstanding

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the thermodynamic constants, specifically the coefficients of volumetric thermal expansion (denoted as ##\dot{\alpha}##) and bulk compliance (denoted as ##\dot{\beta}##). The inclusion of volume (V) in their definitions simplifies their physical dimensions to ##T^{-1}## and ##P^{-1}##, making them independent of the system's volume. The conversation highlights the importance of these definitions in providing consistent values that vary with temperature and pressure, and emphasizes the utility of these coefficients in expressing the thermal expansion nature of materials.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of thermodynamic principles and definitions
  • Familiarity with volumetric thermal expansion and bulk compliance concepts
  • Knowledge of calculus, particularly differentiation and integration
  • Basic grasp of physical dimensions and units in thermodynamics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and applications of the coefficient of volumetric thermal expansion (##\dot{\alpha}##)
  • Explore the concept of bulk compliance and its relationship to the bulk modulus
  • Learn about the implications of temperature and pressure on thermodynamic properties
  • Investigate real-world applications of thermal expansion in engineering materials
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, engineering, and materials science who seek to deepen their understanding of thermodynamic constants and their practical applications in thermal expansion and material behavior.

mohamed_a
Messages
36
Reaction score
6
I was reading about thermodynamics in my textbook wheni came across the following thermodynamics constants:
1658871292131.png

However, i don't understand why did we define 1/V inthe constants. What is the point in doing this?
 
Science news on Phys.org
By dividing by V, physical dimensions or units of dotted ##\alpha,\beta## become simple, i.e. ##T^{-1},P^{-1}.##
Now dotted ##\alpha,\beta## do not depend on volume of the system e.g. 200 ml or 400 ml of volume prepared in the experiments do not matter for measurement of these constants.
 
##\dot{\alpha}## and ##\dot{\beta}## are not constants. They vary (typically gradually) with both temperature and pressure. However, the V's are included in these definitions because ##\dot{\alpha}## is what we conventionally define as the coefficient of volumetric thermal expansion and ##\dot{\beta}## is what we conventionally define as the bulk compliance of a material (the reciprocal of the bulk modulus).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
anuttarasammyak said:
By dividing by V, physical dimensions or units of dotted ##\alpha,\beta## become simple, i.e. ##T^{-1},P^{-1}.##
Now dotted ##\alpha,\beta## do not depend on volume of the system e.g. 200 ml or 400 ml of volume prepared in the experiments do not matter for measurement of these constants.
i still can't find a use of this .So, omitting the V would just make the coefficient more intuitive, for example alpha being meter cube/ kelvin this points more to a rate which makes more sense.
 
Why would your method be better than giving the % change in volume per unit change in temperature? Besides, your method would depend on the initial volume, and this definition wouldn't. Plus, their definition gives a value that is much more constant than yours does. Do you really think you are smarter than these brilliant scientists who worked this out and studied it over the past few hundred years?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Lord Jestocost and vanhees71
Chestermiller said:
##\dot{\alpha}## and ##\dot{\beta}## are not constants. They vary (typically gradually) with both temperature and pressure. However, the V's are included in these definitions because ##\dot{\alpha}## is what we conventionally define as the coefficient of volumetric thermal expansion and ##\dot{\beta}## is what we conventionally define as the bulk compliance of a material (the reciprocal of the bulk modulus).
So is it just a matter of definition?
Chestermiller said:
Why would your method be better than giving the % change in volume per unit change in temperature? Besides, your method would depend on the initial volume, and this definition wouldn't. Plus, their definition gives a value that is much more constant than yours does. Do you really think you are smarter than these brilliant scientists who worked this out and studied it over the past few hundred years?
that's a probing question not an objection because i couldn't grasp the intuition. However, i understood it when i read wikipedia's page about it. the problem is i didn't understand its meaning because i didn't apply it on an example.
 
mohamed_a said:
i still can't find a use of this .So, omitting the V would just make the coefficient more intuitive, for example alpha being meter cube/ kelvin this points more to a rate which makes more sense.
I would tell more about this implication
of definition
\alpha(T,p)=(\frac{\partial \log \frac{V}{V_0}}{\partial T})_p
where ##V_0## is volume with temperature ##T=T_0##
For simplicity of notion under the condition p=const. through the discussion
\alpha(T)=\frac{d \log \frac{V}{V_0}}{d T}
It is integrated to be
V=V_0 e^{\int_{T_0}^T \alpha(T)dt}
In case ##\alpha## is constant
V=V_0 e^{\alpha (T-T_0)}
Further when ##\alpha (T-T_0) << 1##
V=V_0 (1+\alpha (T-T_0))
We can make use of thus defined ##\alpha## to express thermal expansion nature of matter in such a way. I hope you would share its convenience with us.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and mohamed_a
anuttarasammyak said:
I would tell more about this implication
of definition
\alpha(T,p)=(\frac{\partial \log \frac{V}{V_0}}{\partial T})_p
where ##V_0## is volume with temperature ##T=T_0##
For simplicity of notion under the condition p=const. through the discussion
\alpha(T)=\frac{d \log \frac{V}{V_0}}{d T}
It is integrated to be
V=V_0 e^{\int_{T_0}^T \alpha(T)dt}
In case ##\alpha## is constant
V=V_0 e^{\alpha (T-T_0)}
Further when ##\alpha (T-T_0) << 1##
V=V_0 (1+\alpha (T-T_0))
We can make use of thus defined ##\alpha## to express thermal expansion nature of matter in such a way. I hope you would share its convenience with us.
thanks for your generosity. the explanation is amazing and it deepened my understanding
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2, Chestermiller and anuttarasammyak

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K