I Thermodynamics of Black Holes: Analyzing Carnot Cycles

PeteSampras
Messages
43
Reaction score
2
Hello,

I did read one paper about the Carnot cycle in a black hole. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.5982.pdf

After formula (15) this paper says:

1) "The vanishing of CV is the “isochore equals adiabat” result, specific to static black holes, making our Carnot cycles particularly simple to make explicit. We can put a Carnot cycle on the diagram by picking two isotherms for TH and TC, and then dropping two vertical lines between them to close the loop as we did in figure 2."

The vanishing of CV implies that there are isochores curves?

2) "Actually, an explicit expression for Cp would suggest that we ought to have a new engine that we can analyze simply, involving two isobars and two isochores/adiabats"

Cp non zero implies that there are isobars curves.

¿there is someone that understand these two arguments?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
PeteSampras said:
The vanishing of CV implies that there are isochores curves?

That's not what the paper says. The paper says that, for a static black hole, isochoric (constant volume) curves are the same as adiabatic (constant entropy) curves. As the paper says, this is because, for a static black hole, entropy and volume (more precisely the "volume" that appears in the extended black hole thermodynamic equations given in the paper) both depend on the horizon radius, so either one being constant requires the other to be constant as well (since it means the horizon radius is constant).

PeteSampras said:
Cp non zero implies that there are isobars curves.

That's not what the paper says. It says that if you have an explicit expression for ##C_p##, it's easy to analyze an engine where two sides of the loop are isobars (constant pressure curves).
 
  • Like
Likes PeteSampras
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...

Similar threads

Back
Top