Violation of 2nd Law of Thermodynamics

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the implications of using a hypothetical cold reservoir at -5 K in a thermodynamic engine and whether it violates the second law of thermodynamics. Participants clarify that engine efficiency can be calculated using temperatures from two reservoirs, with the efficiency formula depending on these temperatures. The concept of negative temperatures is explored, revealing that they can be considered "hotter" than positive temperatures, which complicates traditional notions of heat flow. A calculation using these temperatures suggests that efficiency could exceed 100%, raising questions about the validity of the second law in this scenario. Understanding the technical definitions of temperature in thermodynamics is crucial for resolving these issues.
yinnxz
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
Imagine that it were possible to construct
a reservoir at −5 K (below absolute zero).
Suppose you ran an engine and used the −5
K reservoir as the cold reservoir.
Would such an engine violate the second
law of thermodynamics?

1. Yes; the engine efficiency would be greater
than 100 %.
2. No, the engine efficiency would be high,
but reasonable.
Relevant Equations
η = Energy out/Total Energy * 100
I don't understand, can you calculate efficiency only using the temperature?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
yinnxz said:
Homework Statement: Imagine that it were possible to construct
a reservoir at −5 K (below absolute zero).
Suppose you ran an engine and used the −5
K reservoir as the cold reservoir.
Would such an engine violate the second
law of thermodynamics?

1. Yes; the engine efficiency would be greater
than 100 %.
2. No, the engine efficiency would be high,
but reasonable.
Relevant Equations: η = Energy out/Total Energy * 100

I don't understand, can you calculate efficiency only using the temperature?
For a Carnot engine the efficiency does only depend on the temperatures.
Look it up in your book or on the internet.

PS: I can't make sense of the "relevant equation" you quote. The terminology is unclear. What is "total energy" and "energy out".
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters, yinnxz and topsquark
Hello @yinnxz ,
:welcome: ##\qquad## !​

with exercises like this, it may be dificult to post your best effort (as required before the PF guidelines allow us to help !), but you can get started by at least posting the second law, so that we are all on the same page. And the 'relevant equation' is only complete if you clarify the variables.

If you already googled some stuff, shaer the lijks as well...

##\ ##
 
yinnxz said:
I don't understand, can you calculate efficiency only using the temperature?
You are right. It takes two temperatures. Two reservoirs. So pick a positive temperature, any positive temperature for the hot reservoir and see where that takes you.

There is an implicit assumption lurking here that heat will spontaneously flow from a positive temperature reservoir to a negative temperature reservoir. If you can Google well, you can discover definitions of thermodynamic temperature which make sense of negative temperatures. In the process, you may learn about the truth (or falsity) of that implicit assumption.
 
This is a better equation I found. Sorry I should have taken a picture instead.

What I did was to plug in 100 on "TH" variable and the -5 K on the "TC" variable. I got an efficiency bigger than 100%. Would that make it violate the 2nd law that states that a system cant have 100% efficiency?
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20230409_090353_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20230409_090353_Chrome.jpg
    9.9 KB · Views: 96
yinnxz said:
Would that make it violate the 2nd law that states that a system cant have 100% efficiency?
In a previous post, I mentioned an implicit assumption that you are making: You are assuming that 100 degrees is hotter than -5 degrees.

"Hotter" in thermodynamics has a technical meaning -- heat will flow spontaneously from the "hotter" reservoir to the "colder" reservoir.

Negative temperatures (which are indeed possible) are hotter than all positive temperatures. The thermodynamic definition of temperature is weird and arguably backward. Reciprocal temperatures behave more sensibly in this regard.
 
  • Like
Likes topsquark, BvU and yinnxz
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top