Thermodynamics problem -- Pressure oscillations in a jar

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a thermodynamics problem involving pressure oscillations in a jar. Participants explore the relationships between pressure, volume, and force, as well as the implications of vector versus scalar representations in the context of the problem.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion regarding the use of the minus sign in the equation ##F=-kx##, questioning its appropriateness when dealing with scalars.
  • Others clarify that the minus sign indicates opposite directions in vector notation, suggesting that ##\vec{F}=-k\vec{x}## is a more accurate representation.
  • There is a query about the validity of the equation ##(p_0+\frac{mg}{A})V_0^{\gamma}=p_2(V_0-Ax)^{\gamma}## and the subsequent derivation of ##p_2##, with some participants proposing that ##x## can be considered small for simplification purposes.
  • One participant suggests further expanding the expression for small ##x## to derive an expression for the net upward force on the ball.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the coordinate system used, specifically the choice of positive direction for ##x## and how it relates to volume changes.
  • There is a discussion on the Taylor series expansion for ##\frac{1}{1-\frac{\gamma Ax}{V_0}}##, with some participants providing approximations for small ##x##.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the interpretation of the equations and the implications of the signs used. Multiple competing views remain regarding the correct representation of the relationships between pressure, volume, and force.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the smallness of ##x## and the dependence on the chosen coordinate system. The discussion also highlights unresolved mathematical steps in the derivations presented.

LagrangeEuler
Messages
711
Reaction score
22
I add a Figure with the problem and solution. I have difficulty with a solution to the given problem. Why ##F=-kx=Adp##, I do not understand minus sign because we are working with scalars not vectors. It is correct to say that
##\vec{F}=-kx\vec{i}##, but is not correct to say that ##F=-kx##. Can you explain to me this part?
 

Attachments

  • problem.png
    problem.png
    33.1 KB · Views: 179
Science news on Phys.org
LagrangeEuler said:
It is correct to say that ##\vec{F}=-kx\vec{i}##, but is not correct to say that ##F=-kx##. Can you explain to me this part?
I would prefer ##\ \vec F = - k\vec x\ ##. The minus sign indicates that the directions are opposite. For motion along a straight line one can dispose of the vector character, but the minus sign stays:$$
\vec F = - k\vec x \Leftrightarrow F \hat \imath = - k x\hat \imath\quad \Rightarrow \quad F = - k x $$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: LagrangeEuler
Is it correct to write
(p_0+\frac{mg}{A})V_0^{\gamma}=p_2(V_0-Ax)^{\gamma}?
From that
p_2=\frac{(p_0+\frac{mg}{A})V_0^{\gamma}}{(V_0-Ax)^{\gamma}}
and
p_2=\frac{p_0+\frac{mg}{A}}{(1-\frac{Ax}{V_0})^{\gamma}}
Can we assume here that ##x## is very small so that
(1+x)^n \approx 1+nx?
From that
p_2=\frac{p_0+\frac{mg}{A}}{1-\frac{\gamma A x}{V_0}}
 
LagrangeEuler said:
Is it correct to write
(p_0+\frac{mg}{A})V_0^{\gamma}=p_2(V_0-Ax)^{\gamma}\ \ ?
Your book says ##\ x = dV/A\ ## so it chooses a coordinate system with upwards as positive x-direction.
So I would write ##V_2 = V_0 + Ax##. Other than that: yes.

One small thing: x can be many ##\mu##m, however. What you mean is ##\displaystyle {{Ax\over V}<< 1}\ ##.

From your last expression (sign corrected) : $$p_2 = \left (p_0+\frac{mg}{A}\right )\ \left (1 - \frac{\gamma A^2 x}{V_0}\right )\quad \Rightarrow \quad \Delta F = p_2A-p_1A=-\frac{\gamma A^2 }{V_0}\left (p_0+\frac{mg}{A}\right )\,x$$

##\ ##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: LagrangeEuler and vanhees71
LagrangeEuler said:
Is it correct to write
(p_0+\frac{mg}{A})V_0^{\gamma}=p_2(V_0-Ax)^{\gamma}?
From that
p_2=\frac{(p_0+\frac{mg}{A})V_0^{\gamma}}{(V_0-Ax)^{\gamma}}
and
p_2=\frac{p_0+\frac{mg}{A}}{(1-\frac{Ax}{V_0})^{\gamma}}
Can we assume here that ##x## is very small so that
(1+x)^n \approx 1+nx?
From that
p_2=\frac{p_0+\frac{mg}{A}}{1-\frac{\gamma A x}{V_0}}
I like what you did here. But, now you can take it one step further by continuing the expansion for small x: $$p_2=(p_0+\frac{mg}{A})+(p_0+\frac{mg}{A})\frac{\gamma A x}{V_0}$$So, $$\Delta p=(p_0+\frac{mg}{A})\frac{\gamma A x}{V_0}$$So the net upward force on the ball is $$F=A\Delta p=(p_0+\frac{mg}{A})\frac{\gamma A^2 }{V_0}x$$where x is the downward displacement.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: LagrangeEuler and vanhees71
BvU said:
Your book says ##\ x = dV/A\ ## so it chooses a coordinate system with upwards as positive x-direction.
So I would write ##V_2 = V_0 + Ax##. Other than that: yes.

One small thing: x can be many ##\mu##m, however. What you mean is ##\displaystyle {{Ax\over V}<< 1}\ ##.

From your last expression (sign corrected) : $$p_2 = \left (p_0+\frac{mg}{A}\right )\ \left (1 - \frac{\gamma A^2 x}{V_0}\right )\quad \Rightarrow \quad \Delta F = p_2A-p_1A=-\frac{\gamma A^2 }{V_0}\left (p_0+\frac{mg}{A}\right )\,x$$

##\ ##
Thanks a lot. Could you just explain me better part ##V_0-Ax## ##\rightarrow## ##V_0+Ax##? I have problem to understand why ##V_2=V_0+Ax## and relation of this and ##x=dV/A##.
 
The Taylor series expansion for ##\frac{1}{1-\frac{\gamma Ax}{V_0}}## is ##\left(1+\frac{\gamma Ax}{V_0}+...\right)##

To linear terms in x, this is $$\frac{1}{1-\frac{\gamma Ax}{V_0}}\approx \left(1+\frac{\gamma Ax}{V_0}\right)$$
 
LagrangeEuler said:
Thanks a lot. Could you just explain me better part ##V_0-Ax## ##\rightarrow## ##V_0+Ax##? I have problem to understand why ##V_2=V_0+Ax## and relation of this and ##x=dV/A##.
If the ball moves up by a distance ##x##, the volume increases by ##Ax\ ##, that's all :smile: !
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
824
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
708
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K