Scientific mental representations of Thermodynamics (original) (raw)
Related papers
Thermodynamics and Controversy
Journal of Chemical Education, 1997
Thermodynamics and Controversy I suspect that there may be a fourth law of thermodynamics: discourse on any thermodynamic topic increases spontaneously (and perhaps exponentially). This reflects the importance of thermodynamics, and its success. Albert Einstein called thermodynamics, "…the only physical theory of universal content concerning which I am convinced that, within the framework of the applicability of its basic concepts, it will never be overthrown." Even a hint of an exception to thermodynamic principles generates the closest possible scrutiny and considerable discussion. The letter that begins below and those that follow beginning on page 281 fill 13 pages in all. They consist of criticisms and a reply related to a three-page paper by José Belandria that appeared in February, 1995. The author's reply to his critics is longer than the original paper, as is one of the criticisms. The critics have had their say, the author has responded, and, on behalf of all the critics, Robert Freeman has prepared a reply to that response. At this point we can consider this issue closed, and the Journal will publish no further comments on Belandria's paper, nor on the criticisms of it that appear here. We thank all of the contributors to this discussion for the time and effort they have devoted to clarifying the situation.
Re-introducing science, 2019
This study refers to the distinction between the macroscopic and microscopic frameworks of thermodynamics and its impact on the teaching and learning of essential principles of the field, such as the conservation of energy through the first law of thermodynamics. We engage in an epistemological analysis and a cognitive approach in order to investigate the limits of the two frameworks and the outcomes of their conflation. From the viewpoint of epistemology, we present a historiographical analysis and also a textbook analysis reflecting the formation of the separate branches of classical and statistical thermodynamics. Through the approach of the cognitive aspect, we report the results from the recent body of research that implies that the blending of the two frameworks impedes the students' accurate interpretations of thermodynamic processes. On this account, we suggest that the macroscopic framework is sufficient for the teaching and learning of introductory level thermodynamics and we briefly present the design principles and results of a teaching and learning sequence for the first law of thermodynamics in upper secondary school students.
Reconsidering the Foundations of Thermodynamics from an Engineering Perspective
Currently, there are two approaches to the foundations of thermodynamics. One, associated with the mechanistic Clausius-Boltzmann tradition, is favored by the physics community. The other, associated with the post-mechanical Carnot tradition, is favored by the engineering community. The bold hypothesis is that the conceptual foundation of engineering thermodynamics is the more comprehensive. Therefore, contrary to the dominant consensus, engineering thermodynamics (ET) represents the true foundation of thermodynamics. The foundational issue is crucial to a number of unresolved current and historical issues in thermodynamic theory and practice. ET formally explains the limited successes of the 'rational mechanical' approaches as idealizing special cases. Thermodynamic phenomena are uniquely dissymmetric and can never be completely understood in terms of symmetry-based mechanical concepts. Consequently, ET understands thermodynamic phenomena in new way, in terms of the post-mechanical formulation of action. The ET concept of action and the action framework trace back to Maupertuis's Principle of Least Action, both clarified in the engineering worldview research program of Lazare and Sadi Carnot. Despite the intervening Lagrangian 'mechanical idealization of action', the original dualistic, indeterminate engineering understanding of action, somewhat unexpectedly, re-emerged in Planck's quantum of action. The link between engineering thermodynamics and quantum theory is not spurious and each of our current formulations helps us develop our understanding of the other. Both the ET and quantum theory understandings of thermodynamic phenomena, as essentially dissymmetric (viz. embracing complementary), entail that there must be an irreducible, cumulative historical, qualitatively emergent, aspect of reality.
13. The Field View on Thermodynamics
When one reads textbooks on the thermodynamics the first time, one feels like reading a scientific paper written in the 18th century. Bulky description of the initial ideas, absence of clear distinction between concepts of heat, temperature and internal energy of the very difference between the system and its exterior - all these features essentially hinder understanding until realization comes that this is just a collection of experimental facts, a block of clay not reduced to the form of plates and dishes necessary for the housewife. Electrodynamics Maxwell’s ideas were much luckier than his thermodynamic ones. Electrodynamics quickly became an accu-rate science and yielded plentiful fruits. Why did this not happen with thermodynamics, even though the gauge of the scientists who devoted their life to thermodynamics is not less? Certainly there are many causes for this, and they are differ-ent. Let us make a supposition concerning cognition side of the problem. In electrodynamics, the electron was detected rather quickly. The concept of current was introduced as charged flow, and this became a powerful incite to the theory development and at-tached clear physical meaning to the concept of field. Until recently the concept of thermodynamic charge was not introduced; instead, the not very transparent idea of a particle was introduced, and instead of an inductively constructed image of a field, they speak about an ensemble of particles that is amalgamated into a “system” that interacts with its “compliment” – the rest of the universe. We are to admit that stochastic description of the ensemble not only did not make more transparent the problem, but even hindered understanding of the problem’s essence. In quantum mechanics, it has led us into blind alley in understanding. Thus the slogan: “I believe because this is absurd” has become the oath of loyalty in modern mainstream physics. The second cause of modern thermodynamics’ problem is apparently reluctance to recognize the fundamental character of Brownian particle movement. See, the fact that Brownian particle movement time is proportional not to the covered path, but its square, immediately differentiates this movement from the concepts of traditional mechanics. Physical analyses of the problem were changed with probabilistic description and purely groundless exchanging of mean for dispersion. But if we can prescribe quite understandable meaning to the word ‘mean’ then what physical meaning can be given to the word ‘dispersion’, which characterizes deviation from the mean? The aim of this article is to formulate field concept in the thermodynamics. Mechanical dimensions for concepts of heat and temperature are introduced, particle’s spin is considered as the charge of the thermodynamic field. The main thermodynamic assertions are paraphrased in these terms.
Further Thoughts on Thermodynamics
viXra, 2016
Recently, attention has been drawn to a number of pieces written concerning classical thermodynamics in a biological setting. Several ideas have been put forward which are unusual for orthodox classical thermodynamics but, as they are supported by experiment, seem to offer suggestions for expanding the scope of that subject and even possibly helping make some aspects more amenable to students. The idea of introducing time into considerations is one such major notion which appears to lead to a new meaning of 'slow' processes in a classical thermodynamic setting and should be examined further because of the possible ramifications for the subject as a whole.
Why so many “schools” of thermodynamics?
Forschung im Ingenieurwesen, 2007
A classification representing some main branches of phenomenological nonequilibrium thermodynamics is discussed. Differences and similarities of these selected branches are explained. Starting out with basic concepts of phenomenological thermodynamics, more developed theories with different back-grounds contributing to contemporary thermodynamics are considered. Because of its vast extent, this field cannot be presented completely in a single reasonably sized paper without any omissions.
Comments on the Second Law of Thermodynamics
Foundations of Mechanics, 1992
For a long time now, confusion has existed in the minds of many over the meaning of various concepts in thermodynamics. Recently, this point has been brought to people's attention by two articles appearing on the well-known archive (arxiv) web site. The content of these two pieces serves to illustrate many of the problems and has occasioned the construction of this answer to at least some of them. The position of the axiom proposed by Carathéodory is central in this matter and here its position is clarified and secured within the framework of thermodynamics. In particular, its relation to the First Law is examined and justified. Introduction. There is little doubt that, although based on phenomena and, possibly more importantly, experiences with which virtually everyone is familiar, confusion does arise in the minds of many when it comes to understanding thermodynamics. However, as was stated on the dust cover of Landsberg's first book on the subject [1], 'Thermodynamics is among the most abstract branches of physics'. Considering the beginnings of the subject were so firmly rooted in so seemingly practical a subject as the theory of heat engines, this appears an almost astonishing statement but a little delving into the theory shows it to be a fairly accurate assessment of the subject and probably indicates one of the reasons for the confusion arising in so many minds. Added to this thought, it is often forgotten that, when considering theories of physics in general, the discussion concerns theories which purport to describe perceived physical happenings. As such, it should be remembered always that it is the physics which is all-important; it is the physical observations which must always provide the impetus in any subsequent investigations. In all this, the mathematics is merely a tool; a very important tool, but still a tool. Therefore, any deductions made must be checked against observed physical fact. It is the physics which must dominate! On the other hand, it often proves difficult to do this as the mathematical theory often appears abstruse to the uninitiated and frequently serves to add to the mysticism some might wish to attach to their chosen field. There is little doubt that this is one factor leading to confusion in the minds of many in various areas of science, of which thermodynamics is but one.
A New Perspective for The Laws of Thermodynamics
Universidad Simón Bolívar, 2024
The main objective of this article is to present the laws of thermodynamics with a new perspective that involves a paradigm shift in the form of reasoning that has traditionally been inductive in nature, now presented with deductive characteristics. The laws are presented at the beginning in the way they are believed to be and then the different components that make them up are described.
Thermodynamics: The Unique Universal Science
Entropy
Thermodynamics is a physical branch of science that governs the thermal behavior of dynamical systems from those as simple as refrigerators to those as complex as our expanding universe. The laws of thermodynamics involving conservation of energy and nonconservation of entropy are, without a doubt, two of the most useful and general laws in all sciences. The first law of thermodynamics, according to which energy cannot be created or destroyed, merely transformed from one form to another, and the second law of thermodynamics, according to which the usable energy in an adiabatically isolated dynamical system is always diminishing in spite of the fact that energy is conserved, have had an impact far beyond science and engineering. In this paper, we trace the history of thermodynamics from its classical to its postmodern forms, and present a tutorial and didactic exposition of thermodynamics as it pertains to some of the deepest secrets of the universe.