Home About Into the Cool BLOG Contents Purchase About the Authors Reviews Videos Links

Into the Cool, Part I, Chapter 5
Nature abhors a Gradient

   

Today, most scientists and students of physics and engineering probably believe that the heyday of thermodynamics was in the nineteenth century with the work of Carnot, Clausius, Boltzmann, and Gibbs. Yet thermodynamics has its twentieth-century heroes as well. In 1908 thermodynamics took a giant step with the work of the German-born mathematician, Constantin Carathéodory. Carathéodory developed a proof that showed "entropy increase" is not so much the general statement of the second law as it is its most fundamental observation—that all natural phenomena are irreversible.

Unlike earlier definitions, Carathéodory's mathematically elegant proof does not depend on the nature of the system, nor on the concepts of entropy or temperature. And although it can be stated poetically, Carathéodory's assertion (as it is called) is mathematically formidable (Carathéodory 1976).

Until the work of Carathéodory, proofs of the second law were based on thought and physical experiments associated with a perfect Carnot engine, or on statistical mechanics. Although rigorous, their scope was limited. Carathéodory's generalization focuses on the irreversibility of thermodynamic processes, rather than on entropy increases per se. By doing so, it gets around the difficult problem of measuring entropy or entropy production in nonequilibrium situations. Remember that entropy or entropy production can be calculated only in systems that are at, or will go to, equilibrium. This ability to shake off the tight shackles around the measurements of entropy gives us greater theoretical clarity to explore thermodynamic systems further.

An irreversible process can be understood as a series of internal constraints removed one by one until a system comes to equilibrium. The constraints can be mechanical, for example, a series of doors that separate a system into compartments. Imagine a box with four compartments with doors that open and close . One of these compartments holds 10,000 molecules of a gas, and the other three compartments contain nothing; they hold a vacuum. What we have then is a gradient or potential gradient blocked by the doors. Upon opening the first door, or constraint, the gas will spread into the next compartment. This part of the system will reach a local equilibrium of roughly 5,000 molecules in each of two boxes, with no perceivable gradient between them. The process repeats as we open the remaining doors until 2,500 molecules or so settle in each of the four boxes. Each time a constraint is removed, that part of the system approaches equilibrium. Once the whole system comes to equilibrium, you cannot determine the order in which the doors between the compartments were opened. Now if we replace the doors with pistons, work could be extracted from the system along the way to equilibrium. These principles of erasure of the path, or past, as work is produced on the way to equilibrium hold for a broad class of thermodynamic systems, from chemical kinetic reactions to a hot cup of tea reaching the temperature of the room….

Back to top >

Part I: The Energetic

1. The Schrödinger Paradox

2. Simplicity

3. Eyes of Fire: Classical Energy Science

4. The Cosmic Casino: Statistical Mechanics

5. Nature Abhors a Gradient

6. The River Must Flow:
Open Systems

7. Too Much, Not Enough: Cycles








A system of ideal molecules going to an equilibrium state as suggested by Kestin (1979). One large box is subdivided into four isolated compartments. Initially all the gas molecules are segregated in one section, and the others hold a vacuum. There is a pressure gradient between the compartments that have molecules within them and those that don't. Opening walls between the compartments breaks down those pressure gradients and results in an equal distribution of the gas among all the sections. This final configuration of gas molecules is at equilibrium. From observing the final equilibrium state, it is impossible to determine the order in which compartments were breached.




 

 

 

 

 


© 2005 Hawkwood Institute • Eric D. SchneiderInto the Cool