Thermodynamics, finding the fundamental equation of ideal gases

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on deriving the fundamental equation for a monoatomic ideal gas using the equations PV=NRT and U=3NRT/2. The participants identify the missing term in the entropy representation, specifically the chemical potential term, and clarify the correct definitions for molar energy and volume. The final derived equation for entropy is S=5NR/2 - N(μ/T)₀ + NR ln[(U/U₀)^(3/2)(V/V₀)(N/N₀)^(-5/2)], correcting earlier mistakes in variable definitions and integration constants.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of thermodynamic equations, specifically PV=NRT and U=3NRT/2.
  • Familiarity with Gibbs-Duhem relation and its application in thermodynamics.
  • Knowledge of entropy representation and its variables.
  • Basic calculus for integration and logarithmic properties.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Gibbs-Duhem relation in thermodynamics.
  • Learn about the implications of variable definitions in thermodynamic equations.
  • Explore the concept of chemical potential in ideal gases.
  • Review entropy calculations for different thermodynamic systems.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics and engineering, particularly those focusing on thermodynamics and gas laws, will benefit from this discussion.

fluidistic
Gold Member
Messages
3,932
Reaction score
283

Homework Statement


An ideal monoatomic gas is characterized by the two equations PV=NRT and U=\frac{3NRT}{2} in which R is a constant.
Find the fundamental equation corresponding to a monoatomic ideal gas.

Homework Equations


S=\left ( \frac{1}{T} \right ) U+\left ( \frac{P}{T} \right ) V- \left ( \frac{\mu }{T} \right ) N.


The Attempt at a Solution


I'm given 2 equations of state, one is missing in order to get the fundamental equation. In the entropy representation the variables of the fundamental equation are \frac{1}{T}, \frac{P}{T} and \frac{\mu }{T}.
The missing one is \frac{\mu }{T} (U,V,N)=\frac{\mu}{T} (u,v) where u and v in lower script are the molar energy and volume respectively.
So I have that \frac{1}{T}=\frac{3R}{2u} and \frac{P}{T}=\frac{R}{v}.
I use Gibbs-Duhem's relation d \left ( \frac{\mu }{T} \right ) =ud \left ( \frac{1 }{T} \right ) +v d \left ( \frac{P }{T} \right ). Replacing the variables in parenthesis and integrating both sides, I reach (like the book): \frac{\mu}{T}=-\frac{3}{2}R \ln \left ( \frac{u}{u_0} \right ) -R \ln \left ( \frac{v}{v_0} \right ) +\left ( \frac{\mu }{\mu _0} \right ) _0.
When I replace this equation into the expression for S given above and using the fact that u=N/U, u_0=\frac{N}{U_0}, I reach that S =\frac{3U^2 R}{2N}+\frac{RV^2}{N}+ N \left [ \frac{3R}{2} \ln \left ( \frac{U_0}{U} \right ) +R\ln \left ( \frac{V_0}{V} \right ) - \left ( \frac{\mu }{T} \right ) _0 \right ]. Using some log property this simplifies to S=\frac{3U^2R}{2N} +\frac{RV^2}{N} +NR \ln \left [ \left ( \frac{U_0}{U} \right ) ^{3/2} \left ( \frac{V_0}{V} \right ) \right ] -N \left ( \frac{\mu }{\mu _0} \right ) _0.
However this differs from the answer given in the book: S= \frac {5NR}{2}-N \left ( \frac {\mu }{T} \right ) _0 +NR \ln \left [ \left ( \frac {U}{U_0} \right ) ^{3/2} \left ( \frac{V}{V_0} \right ) \left ( \frac {N}{N_0} \right ) ^{-5/2} \right ].
I do not see, for the life of me, what I've done wrong.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi fluidistic.

Let's start with your integration constant.
It should be ##(\frac{\mu}{T})_0## instead of ##(\frac{\mu}{\mu_0})_0##.

Then you write u=N/U, but that is not right.
Since you defined u to be the molar volume, u=U/N.

Perhaps you can redo it?
 
Thanks a lot for helping me!
You are absolutely right, I've redone everything with more care. I reach however S=\frac{5RN}{2}-N \left ( \frac{\mu}{T} \right ) _0+NR \ln \left [ \left ( \frac{U}{U_0} \right ) ^{3/2} \left ( \frac{V}{V_0} \right ) \right ].
Therefore it seems like I'm missing a term in the logarithm.
It seems it comes from the integration of the Gibbs-Duhem relation: d \left ( \frac{\mu }{T} \right ) =ud \left ( \frac{1 }{T} \right ) +v d \left ( \frac{P }{T} \right ). It seems that when I integrate I should get an extra term like "-R \ln \left ( \frac{N}{N_0} \right ). I don't really know how to get that.
 
Maybe it's simpler than you think.
What did you fill in for ##u_0##?
 
Last edited:
I like Serena said:
Maybe it's simpler than you think.
What did you fill in for ##u_0##?
Hmm I still don't see it. I took u_0=\frac{U_0}{N}.
 
fluidistic said:
Hmm I still don't see it. I took u_0=\frac{U_0}{N}.

Note that N is also a variable that changes.
It has an initial value too, just like ##u_0## and ##U_0##.
 
I like Serena said:
Note that N is also a variable that changes.
It has an initial value too, just like ##u_0## and ##U_0##.

Yes I know this but when should I make use of this?
Here are my steps:
1)\frac{1}{T}=\frac{3NR}{2U}=\frac{3R}{2u}
2)\frac{P}{T}=\frac{NR}{V}=\frac{R}{v}
I use Gibbs-Duhem's relation d \left ( \frac{\mu }{T} \right ) =ud \left ( \frac{1 }{T} \right ) +v d \left ( \frac{P }{T} \right ).
3)ud \left ( \frac{1 }{T} \right ) =-\frac{3Rdu}{2u}
4)v d \left ( \frac{P }{T} \right ) =-R\frac{dv}{v}.
Integrating the GD relations gives me \frac{\mu}{T}=-\frac{3}{2}R \ln \left ( \frac{u}{u_0} \right ) -R \ln \left ( \frac{v}{v_0} \right ) +\left ( \frac{\mu }{T} \right ) _0. The book (Callen's page 52) reaches exactly the same result so far.
He then says that inserting this into the Euler equation S=\left ( \frac{1}{T} \right ) U+\left ( \frac{P}{T} \right ) V- \left ( \frac{\mu }{T} \right ) N one reaches S= \frac {5NR}{2}-N \left ( \frac {\mu }{T} \right ) _0 +NR \ln \left [ \left ( \frac {U}{U_0} \right ) ^{3/2} \left ( \frac{V}{V_0} \right ) \left ( \frac {N}{N_0} \right ) ^{-5/2} \right ].
So my error is when I insert what I obtained into the Euler equation or it's in integrating GD relation (in which case the book would also be wrong) or it's in either of the 4 steps I denoted by 1), etc.?
I really don't see it. :/
 
I got to your book result substituting ##u_0=\frac{U_0}{N_0}## and ##v_0=\frac{V_0}{N_0}## in the integrated GD result.
 
I like Serena said:
I got to your book result substituting ##u_0=\frac{U_0}{N_0}## and ##v_0=\frac{V_0}{N_0}## in the integrated GD result.

Ah! That explains everything :biggrin: In my case those were variables, I didn't even notice. Now I reach the desired result... thank you very much for all.
 
  • #10
Just out of curiosity, were my previous hints too cryptic?
It is not my intention to make a thread a cryptic puzzle...
Perhaps you have an idea what kind of hint I might have given that would have helped you better?
 
  • #11
I like Serena said:
Just out of curiosity, were my previous hints too cryptic?
It is not my intention to make a thread a cryptic puzzle...
Perhaps you have an idea what kind of hint I might have given that would have helped you better?

You mean post 6? No, not cryptic. In fact now I understand your "hint" that I should have used N_0 instead of N. I did not realize that with my definition of u_0, it wasn't even a constant.
So in my case pointing out in post 6 that my definition of u_0 was wrong and that it's not even a constant would have made me understand where the problem lies. I did not realize it, because I already knew that N was a variable and I thought that was what you wanted me to know.
But I'm maybe a "weird learner" :) Anyway, thank you very much for having went through all of this with me.
 
  • #12
Okay. Thanks.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
785
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K