Van der Waals gas - free energy

Quelsita
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
For this problem, I'm really jst trying to figure out everything that is going on and then I can simply follow through with the derivatives once I know what I'm working with.

Q: For the van der Waals gas, introduce the free energy as F = U – TS and verify that its derivatives over V and T give the correct expressions for p and S.

I know the eqaution for free energy is the Helmholz free energy where
F=( Hem.) free energy
U= Internal energy of the system
T= absolute temperature (K)
S= Entropy

From the first law of thermo. :
L=-\DeltaU +Q (L being the external work)

since the system is in thermal contact w/ an environment at constant temperature and transforming from a state A to B:

\int(dQ/T) \leqS(B)-S(A)

and since T is constant throughout I can say that:
Q= \int(dQ) \leq T{S(B)-S(A)}

my question is, where did the inequality come from??

Then, I can plug in Q to the First law?:
L\leq -\DeltaU+ T{S(B)-S(A)}
L\leq U(A)-U(B) + T{S(B)-S(A)}
again, why is an inequality used?
where does the volume and pressure come into play?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ok, is the inequality used because the process is not reversible?
can L=pdV be applied somewhere?

also, I found in our text that deltaF=(dF/dV) dV and it states that this was found using:
L< F(A)-F(B)= -deltaF...how is this so?
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top