Why Does Heat Come from the Air to Melt Ice in Water?

Chronos000
Messages
80
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



an ice cube is melted in water which is continuously stirred to be at a constant temperature of 0 degrees. the stirring is gentle enough so the work done is negligible.

my question is why in this case does the heat come from the air to melt the ice cube and not the water. why can't it be a bit of both or just the water.

also, for the total entropy change of the universe, wouldn't I just consider the S:ice + S:water = S:air?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Chronos000 said:

Homework Statement



an ice cube is melted in water which is continuously stirred to be at a constant temperature of 0 degrees. the stirring is gentle enough so the work done is negligible.

my question is why in this case does the heat come from the air to melt the ice cube and not the water. why can't it be a bit of both or just the water.
Heat flow requires a temperature difference. Without heat flowing from the air to the water/ice, the water and the ice would reach and remain at the same temperature, 0C, and then there would be no further heat flow. So heat flow must occur from the surroundings to the water/ice.
also, for the total entropy change of the universe, wouldn't I just consider the S:ice + S:water = S:air?
The total entropy change is:

\Delta S_{universe} = \Delta S_{ice} + \Delta S_{water} + \Delta S_{air}

AM
 
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