Why Is the Bottle Warmer on One Side?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Valhalla
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Thermodynamics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the temperature differential observed in a bottle placed on a windowsill, where one side is warmer than the other despite the room being in thermal equilibrium with the outside. Participants debate the mechanisms of heat transfer, concluding that conduction, convection, and radiation are the primary methods, with radiation being a likely cause for the temperature difference. Some argue that if the room is truly in thermal equilibrium, the entire bottle should be isothermal, questioning the validity of the scenario. Others suggest that the side of the bottle facing the window might receive more solar radiation, contributing to the temperature disparity. Ultimately, the consensus is that the question is flawed due to its assumptions about thermal equilibrium.
Valhalla
Messages
69
Reaction score
0
An empty bottle sits on a windowsill next to a closed window inside a house. The outside and the house are in thermal equilibrium. Yet, the side of the bottle OPPOSITE the window has a higher temp then the side touching the window. How can this be? (Assume nothing is touching the bottle except the windowsill)

Well, this is what I reasoned so far. There is only 3 ways that heat can be transferred, conduction, convection, and radiation. There is no conduction that is heating the hotter side because there is nothing touching it. It can't be convection b/c the room is in thermal equilibrium with the outside. It has to be the fact that something in side the room is radiating energy onto it.

Does this make sense? Any other ideas?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
possibly the sun's energy
 
Valhalla said:
An empty bottle sits on a windowsill next to a closed window inside a house. The outside and the house are in thermal equilibrium. Yet, the side of the bottle OPPOSITE the window has a higher temp then the side touching the window. How can this be? (Assume nothing is touching the bottle except the windowsill)

Well, this is what I reasoned so far. There is only 3 ways that heat can be transferred, conduction, convection, and radiation. There is no conduction that is heating the hotter side because there is nothing touching it. It can't be convection b/c the room is in thermal equilibrium with the outside. It has to be the fact that something in side the room is radiating energy onto it.

Does this make sense? Any other ideas?
Is there any air in the room? If there is air in the room, I don't see how the bottle can be at different temperatures and still have the air in the room at thermal equilibrium (which must mean all at the same temperature).

AM
 
An empty bottle sits on a windowsill next to a closed window inside a house. The outside and the house are in thermal equilibrium. Yet, the side of the bottle OPPOSITE the window has a higher temp then the side touching the window. How can this be? (Assume nothing is touching the bottle except the windowsill)

This question is bad. (1) How can you assume nothing is touching the bottle except the windowsill, yet its touching the window at the same time. (2) If everything is in thermal equilibrium, as AM has already said, it MUST be isothermal everywhere. (3) The anwser, I think, which is still crap, is that the side touching the window transfers heat due to conduction of the glass, and the side exposed to air gets conduction and convection. So there is a temperature differential. But this is only during the process that it heats up to room temp. Afterwards, it will be isothermal everywhere. Another possibility is that the side nearer the window receives more solar radiation than the other side. But this would be such a small difference. If the bottle is clear, the radiation should pass through both sides. Eh, I don't know what to tell you.
 
Last edited:
Ok this is the solution that was given...

The bottle has been just turned around.


How can this even be assumed from the question? It states the room was in thermal equilibrium with the outside therefore via the zeroth law the bottle has to be in thermal equilibrium too! I agree this question is horrible.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top