Why Define Internal Energy Using Average Mechanical Energy?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the definition of internal energy, which is described as the sum of mechanical energies of particles in a thermodynamic system but is defined using average mechanical energy instead. Participants express confusion over the textbook's approach, particularly regarding the treatment of kinetic and potential energies. Criticism is directed at the OpenStax physics textbook for containing errors, with suggestions to seek better resources. Clarifications are made that potential energy should consider the interactions between molecules rather than individual contributions. The conversation emphasizes the need for accurate definitions in thermodynamic equations.
member 731016
Homework Statement
Please see below
Relevant Equations
Please see below
For this,
1686176928116.png

They say internal energy is the sum of the all the mechanical energies of each particle in within the thermodynamic system, however, they then define internal energy differently using the average mechanical energy for all particles within the system (Pink equation). Does someone please know why they did that?

Many thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ChiralSuperfields said:
Does someone please know why they did that?
No, nor why they talk about the "bars over K and U" when there clearly aren't any. You have two choices:
  1. find a better book; or
  2. use your common sense to eliminate mistakes in trivial definitions.
Posting here to ask us why an unknown author makes mistakes won't help anyone.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
pbuk said:
No, nor why they talk about the "bars over K and U" when there clearly aren't any. You have two choices:
  1. find a better book; or
  2. use your common sense to eliminate mistakes in trivial definitions.
Posting here to ask us why an unknown author makes mistakes won't help anyone.
Thank you for your reply @pbuk!

There is actually bars,
1686179789656.png

I think the highlighter might have made them hard to see.

Sorry I don't have any common sense since I am do not have any other experience with an equation of internal energy. What internal energy equation do you use?

Many thanks!
 
It looks to me like a conflation of two expressions: ##E_{int}=\Sigma_{i=1}^N(K_i+U_i)=N(\bar K+\bar U)##.
But the opening sentence is wrong, it is not the sum of individual kinetic and potential energies.
For the KE, as is later clarified, the sum is over the KEs in the frame of reference of the common mass centre.
For potential energy, the sum over i makes no sense since individual molecules do not have PE. Internal PE resides in the forces between the molecules and the potential of those forces to do work. Further, this is distinct from PE involving external forces.

What is the book?
 
  • Like
Likes Chestermiller, pbuk and member 731016
haruspex said:
It looks to me like a conflation of two expressions: ##E_{int}=\Sigma_{i=1}^N(K_i+U_i)=N(\bar K+\bar U)##.
But the opening sentence is wrong, it is not the sum of individual kinetic and potential energies.
For the KE, as is later clarified, the sum is over the KEs in the frame of reference of the common mass centre.
For potential energy, the sum over i makes no sense since individual molecules do not have PE. Internal PE resides in the forces between the molecules and the potential of those forces to do work. Further, this is distinct from PE involving external forces.

What is the book?
Thank you for your reply @haruspex!

The textbook is the OpenStax physics volume 2. Here is a link to the section I am referring to: https://openstax.org/books/university-physics-volume-2/pages/3-2-work-heat-and-internal-energy

Many thanks!
 
Sadly that is the textbook we are using for my course.
 
  • Like
Likes scottdave, MatinSAR, malawi_glenn and 2 others
haruspex said:
Oh dear. OpenStax openly sux. I have reported hundreds of errors to them, many of which they refuse to fix.
Thank you for your reply @haruspex! Yeah there is a quite a few errors :(
 
haruspex said:
It looks to me like a conflation of two expressions: ##E_{int}=\Sigma_{i=1}^N(K_i+U_i)=N(\bar K+\bar U)##.
But the opening sentence is wrong, it is not the sum of individual kinetic and potential energies.
For the KE, as is later clarified, the sum is over the KEs in the frame of reference of the common mass centre.
For potential energy, the sum over i makes no sense since individual molecules do not have PE. Internal PE resides in the forces between the molecules and the potential of those forces to do work. Further, this is distinct from PE involving external forces.

What is the book?
Couldn't ##U_i## be considered the amount of work needed to bring a given molecule from infinity to its present location, holding the locations of all other molecules at their present positions?
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
  • #10
Chestermiller said:
Couldn't ##U_i## be considered the amount of work needed to bring a given molecule from infinity to its present location, holding the locations of all other molecules at their present positions?
Yes, provided you make it ##\frac 12\Sigma U_i##.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
Back
Top