Calculating entropy change: reversible vs irreversible processCalculating entropy: why consider a reversible path?Formula of entropy changeIs there no irreversible way of moving between two equilibrium states at constant T and P?Calculating entropy change of surroundingsWhat is the difference between reversible and irreversible work done in adiabatic process?Is entropy change of the system for reversible process same as entropy change of the system for irreversible change?Is the total entropy change of all isothermal processes 0?Calculation of irreversible surrounding entropyHow would one calculate the entropy change for an adiabatic irreversible process?Entropy change of isothermal irreversible expansion of ideal gas
strToHex ( string to its hex representation as string)
A newer friend of my brother's gave him a load of baseball cards that are supposedly extremely valuable. Is this a scam?
How to format long polynomial?
How is the claim "I am in New York only if I am in America" the same as "If I am in New York, then I am in America?
Is it important to consider tone, melody, and musical form while writing a song?
Can I make popcorn with any corn?
How did the USSR manage to innovate in an environment characterized by government censorship and high bureaucracy?
What's the output of a record cartridge playing an out-of-speed record
The use of multiple foreign keys on same column in SQL Server
How can bays and straits be determined in a procedurally generated map?
An academic/student plagiarism
"You are your self first supporter", a more proper way to say it
Can I ask the recruiters in my resume to put the reason why I am rejected?
Why was the small council so happy for Tyrion to become the Master of Coin?
Example of a continuous function that don't have a continuous extension
How old can references or sources in a thesis be?
Is it unprofessional to ask if a job posting on GlassDoor is real?
Prove that NP is closed under karp reduction?
Why, historically, did Gödel think CH was false?
Have astronauts in space suits ever taken selfies? If so, how?
Why doesn't Newton's third law mean a person bounces back to where they started when they hit the ground?
How does one intimidate enemies without having the capacity for violence?
Can divisibility rules for digits be generalized to sum of digits
Is it legal for company to use my work email to pretend I still work there?
Calculating entropy change: reversible vs irreversible process
Calculating entropy: why consider a reversible path?Formula of entropy changeIs there no irreversible way of moving between two equilibrium states at constant T and P?Calculating entropy change of surroundingsWhat is the difference between reversible and irreversible work done in adiabatic process?Is entropy change of the system for reversible process same as entropy change of the system for irreversible change?Is the total entropy change of all isothermal processes 0?Calculation of irreversible surrounding entropyHow would one calculate the entropy change for an adiabatic irreversible process?Entropy change of isothermal irreversible expansion of ideal gas
$begingroup$
Since the change in internal energy and enthalpy, which are equal to the heats for a constant-volume and constant-pressure process, respectively, are state functions, the heats for a reversible v.s. irreversible process should be equal. Thus, the entropy change of the surroundings which equals the quotient of the heat and temperature are equal for reversible v.s. irreversible processes.
As Engel's Physical Chemistry states it:
Because H and U are state functions, the amount of heat entering the surroundings is independent of the path; q is the same whether the transfer occurs reversibly or irreversibly.
However, when the book proceeds to evaluating the change in entropy for the surroundings for a reversible vs irreersible process, the q used for evaluating the change in entropy of surroundings are not equal for the reversible v.s. irreversible process, which contradicts what the textbook previously stated.
The question:
One mole of an ideal gas at 300. K is reversibly and isothermally compressed from a volume of 25.0 L to a volume of 10.0 L. Because the water bath thermal reservoir in the surroundings is very large, T remains essentially constant at 300. K during the process.
Calculation of change in entropy for reversible path:
Calculation for irreversible path:
It seems that the book used the actual heat for the irreversible process. However, I don't understand why the entropy's from the two calculations are not equal. Also, I fail to understand why the change in entropy for the surroundings are not equal for the two process for which the final and initial states are equal --> change in entropy is a state function and should be the same regardless of path.
References
Engel, Thomas, and Philip Reid. Physical Chemistry. San Francisco: Pearson Benjamin Cummings, 2006.
physical-chemistry thermodynamics
asked Apr 3 at 16:12
EthiopiusEthiopius
4011114
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since the change in internal energy and enthalpy, which are equal to the heats for a constant-volume and constant-pressure process, respectively, are state functions, the heats for a reversible v.s. irreversible process should be equal. Thus, the entropy change of the surroundings which equals the quotient of the heat and temperature are equal for reversible v.s. irreversible processes.
As Engel's Physical Chemistry states it:
Because H and U are state functions, the amount of heat entering the surroundings is independent of the path; q is the same whether the transfer occurs reversibly or irreversibly.
However, when the book proceeds to evaluating the change in entropy for the surroundings for a reversible vs irreersible process, the q used for evaluating the change in entropy of surroundings are not equal for the reversible v.s. irreversible process, which contradicts what the textbook previously stated.
The question:
One mole of an ideal gas at 300. K is reversibly and isothermally compressed from a volume of 25.0 L to a volume of 10.0 L. Because the water bath thermal reservoir in the surroundings is very large, T remains essentially constant at 300. K during the process.
Calculation of change in entropy for reversible path:
Calculation for irreversible path:
It seems that the book used the actual heat for the irreversible process. However, I don't understand why the entropy's from the two calculations are not equal. Also, I fail to understand why the change in entropy for the surroundings are not equal for the two process for which the final and initial states are equal --> change in entropy is a state function and should be the same regardless of path.
References
Engel, Thomas, and Philip Reid. Physical Chemistry. San Francisco: Pearson Benjamin Cummings, 2006.
physical-chemistry thermodynamics
asked Apr 3 at 16:12
EthiopiusEthiopius
4011114
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Update: I am starting to get the feeling that (somehow) the final state of the surroundings after an irreversible process is not the same as the final state of the surroundings after a reversible process. Something (for example, friction between the piston and walls of container) make the final states of surroundings different for irreversible vs reversible --> change in S is not the same. However, since the initial and final T and V are the same for the system in reversible and irreversible, the change in entropy is the same for reversible vs irreversible for system. Is this a valid argument?
$endgroup$
– Ethiopius
Apr 3 at 17:09
1
$begingroup$
Entropy change of your system will be the same for both the reversible and irreversible path. However, the entropy of the surroundings will not be the same , as you have seen. The system goes from the same state A to the same state B for both the reversible and irreversible paths, the surroundings are not in the same state after an irreversible process as they would be after a reversible one. @Ethiopius
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
Apr 3 at 17:31
1
$begingroup$
@Tyberius What you mean is that the surroundings are not in the same state after an irreversible process imposed on the system as they would be after a reversible process imposed on the system between its same two end states.
$endgroup$
– Chet Miller
Apr 3 at 23:01
1
$begingroup$
@ChetMiller That is a clearer description. The way I had phrased I was open to misinterpretation.
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
Apr 3 at 23:03
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since the change in internal energy and enthalpy, which are equal to the heats for a constant-volume and constant-pressure process, respectively, are state functions, the heats for a reversible v.s. irreversible process should be equal. Thus, the entropy change of the surroundings which equals the quotient of the heat and temperature are equal for reversible v.s. irreversible processes.
As Engel's Physical Chemistry states it:
Because H and U are state functions, the amount of heat entering the surroundings is independent of the path; q is the same whether the transfer occurs reversibly or irreversibly.
However, when the book proceeds to evaluating the change in entropy for the surroundings for a reversible vs irreersible process, the q used for evaluating the change in entropy of surroundings are not equal for the reversible v.s. irreversible process, which contradicts what the textbook previously stated.
The question:
One mole of an ideal gas at 300. K is reversibly and isothermally compressed from a volume of 25.0 L to a volume of 10.0 L. Because the water bath thermal reservoir in the surroundings is very large, T remains essentially constant at 300. K during the process.
Calculation of change in entropy for reversible path:
Calculation for irreversible path:
It seems that the book used the actual heat for the irreversible process. However, I don't understand why the entropy's from the two calculations are not equal. Also, I fail to understand why the change in entropy for the surroundings are not equal for the two process for which the final and initial states are equal --> change in entropy is a state function and should be the same regardless of path.
References
Engel, Thomas, and Philip Reid. Physical Chemistry. San Francisco: Pearson Benjamin Cummings, 2006.
physical-chemistry thermodynamics
asked Apr 3 at 16:12
EthiopiusEthiopius
4011114
$endgroup$
Since the change in internal energy and enthalpy, which are equal to the heats for a constant-volume and constant-pressure process, respectively, are state functions, the heats for a reversible v.s. irreversible process should be equal. Thus, the entropy change of the surroundings which equals the quotient of the heat and temperature are equal for reversible v.s. irreversible processes.
As Engel's Physical Chemistry states it:
Because H and U are state functions, the amount of heat entering the surroundings is independent of the path; q is the same whether the transfer occurs reversibly or irreversibly.
However, when the book proceeds to evaluating the change in entropy for the surroundings for a reversible vs irreersible process, the q used for evaluating the change in entropy of surroundings are not equal for the reversible v.s. irreversible process, which contradicts what the textbook previously stated.
The question:
One mole of an ideal gas at 300. K is reversibly and isothermally compressed from a volume of 25.0 L to a volume of 10.0 L. Because the water bath thermal reservoir in the surroundings is very large, T remains essentially constant at 300. K during the process.
Calculation of change in entropy for reversible path:
Calculation for irreversible path:
It seems that the book used the actual heat for the irreversible process. However, I don't understand why the entropy's from the two calculations are not equal. Also, I fail to understand why the change in entropy for the surroundings are not equal for the two process for which the final and initial states are equal --> change in entropy is a state function and should be the same regardless of path.
References
Engel, Thomas, and Philip Reid. Physical Chemistry. San Francisco: Pearson Benjamin Cummings, 2006.
physical-chemistry thermodynamics
physical-chemistry thermodynamics
asked Apr 3 at 16:12
EthiopiusEthiopius
4011114
asked Apr 3 at 16:12
EthiopiusEthiopius
4011114
edited Apr 3 at 17:10
Ethiopius
asked Apr 3 at 16:12
EthiopiusEthiopius
4011114
asked Apr 3 at 16:12
EthiopiusEthiopius
4011114
asked Apr 3 at 16:12
EthiopiusEthiopius
4011114
4011114
$begingroup$
Update: I am starting to get the feeling that (somehow) the final state of the surroundings after an irreversible process is not the same as the final state of the surroundings after a reversible process. Something (for example, friction between the piston and walls of container) make the final states of surroundings different for irreversible vs reversible --> change in S is not the same. However, since the initial and final T and V are the same for the system in reversible and irreversible, the change in entropy is the same for reversible vs irreversible for system. Is this a valid argument?
$endgroup$
– Ethiopius
Apr 3 at 17:09
1
$begingroup$
Entropy change of your system will be the same for both the reversible and irreversible path. However, the entropy of the surroundings will not be the same , as you have seen. The system goes from the same state A to the same state B for both the reversible and irreversible paths, the surroundings are not in the same state after an irreversible process as they would be after a reversible one. @Ethiopius
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
Apr 3 at 17:31
1
$begingroup$
@Tyberius What you mean is that the surroundings are not in the same state after an irreversible process imposed on the system as they would be after a reversible process imposed on the system between its same two end states.
$endgroup$
– Chet Miller
Apr 3 at 23:01
1
$begingroup$
@ChetMiller That is a clearer description. The way I had phrased I was open to misinterpretation.
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
Apr 3 at 23:03
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Update: I am starting to get the feeling that (somehow) the final state of the surroundings after an irreversible process is not the same as the final state of the surroundings after a reversible process. Something (for example, friction between the piston and walls of container) make the final states of surroundings different for irreversible vs reversible --> change in S is not the same. However, since the initial and final T and V are the same for the system in reversible and irreversible, the change in entropy is the same for reversible vs irreversible for system. Is this a valid argument?
$endgroup$
– Ethiopius
Apr 3 at 17:09
1
$begingroup$
Entropy change of your system will be the same for both the reversible and irreversible path. However, the entropy of the surroundings will not be the same , as you have seen. The system goes from the same state A to the same state B for both the reversible and irreversible paths, the surroundings are not in the same state after an irreversible process as they would be after a reversible one. @Ethiopius
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
Apr 3 at 17:31
1
$begingroup$
@Tyberius What you mean is that the surroundings are not in the same state after an irreversible process imposed on the system as they would be after a reversible process imposed on the system between its same two end states.
$endgroup$
– Chet Miller
Apr 3 at 23:01
1
$begingroup$
@ChetMiller That is a clearer description. The way I had phrased I was open to misinterpretation.
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
Apr 3 at 23:03
$begingroup$
Update: I am starting to get the feeling that (somehow) the final state of the surroundings after an irreversible process is not the same as the final state of the surroundings after a reversible process. Something (for example, friction between the piston and walls of container) make the final states of surroundings different for irreversible vs reversible --> change in S is not the same. However, since the initial and final T and V are the same for the system in reversible and irreversible, the change in entropy is the same for reversible vs irreversible for system. Is this a valid argument?
$endgroup$
– Ethiopius
Apr 3 at 17:09
$begingroup$
Update: I am starting to get the feeling that (somehow) the final state of the surroundings after an irreversible process is not the same as the final state of the surroundings after a reversible process. Something (for example, friction between the piston and walls of container) make the final states of surroundings different for irreversible vs reversible --> change in S is not the same. However, since the initial and final T and V are the same for the system in reversible and irreversible, the change in entropy is the same for reversible vs irreversible for system. Is this a valid argument?
$endgroup$
– Ethiopius
Apr 3 at 17:09
1
1
$begingroup$
Entropy change of your system will be the same for both the reversible and irreversible path. However, the entropy of the surroundings will not be the same , as you have seen. The system goes from the same state A to the same state B for both the reversible and irreversible paths, the surroundings are not in the same state after an irreversible process as they would be after a reversible one. @Ethiopius
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
Apr 3 at 17:31
$begingroup$
Entropy change of your system will be the same for both the reversible and irreversible path. However, the entropy of the surroundings will not be the same , as you have seen. The system goes from the same state A to the same state B for both the reversible and irreversible paths, the surroundings are not in the same state after an irreversible process as they would be after a reversible one. @Ethiopius
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
Apr 3 at 17:31
1
1
$begingroup$
@Tyberius What you mean is that the surroundings are not in the same state after an irreversible process imposed on the system as they would be after a reversible process imposed on the system between its same two end states.
$endgroup$
– Chet Miller
Apr 3 at 23:01
$begingroup$
@Tyberius What you mean is that the surroundings are not in the same state after an irreversible process imposed on the system as they would be after a reversible process imposed on the system between its same two end states.
$endgroup$
– Chet Miller
Apr 3 at 23:01
1
1
$begingroup$
@ChetMiller That is a clearer description. The way I had phrased I was open to misinterpretation.
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
Apr 3 at 23:03
$begingroup$
@ChetMiller That is a clearer description. The way I had phrased I was open to misinterpretation.
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
Apr 3 at 23:03
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
You are confused about how to calculate the entropy change for a system and surroundings that have experienced an irreversible process. For the irreversible path, you correctly calculated the final state using the first law of thermodynamics. From this point on, you must totally forget about the irreversible path and, instead, focus exclusively on the initial and final end states. You must separate the system from the surroundings, and then devise an alternative reversible path for each of them separately that takes each from its initial state to its final state. You did that correctly for the system, and determined its correct entropy change (-7.62 J/K). This is the entropy change for the system both for the reversible path you devised as well as for the actual irreversible path.
In the case of the surroundings, during the irreversible process, its internal energy increased by 3.741 kJ at the constant temperature of 300 K. So, for its alternative reversible path, to achieve this same internal energy change at 300 K, the amount of reversible heat it would have to absorb would be the same 3.741 kJ. So, the change in entropy of the surroundings in the irreversible process was 12.47 J/K.
I know that this might all sound a little confusing. So here is a more detailed explanation of the fundamentals as well as a cookbook (foolproof) recipe for determining the change in entropy of the system and surroundings for any arbitrary irreversible process on a closed system (including worked examples of the methodology): https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/grandpa-chets-entropy-recipe/
answered Apr 3 at 17:13
Chet MillerChet Miller
6,5261513
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "431"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f112088%2fcalculating-entropy-change-reversible-vs-irreversible-process%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
You are confused about how to calculate the entropy change for a system and surroundings that have experienced an irreversible process. For the irreversible path, you correctly calculated the final state using the first law of thermodynamics. From this point on, you must totally forget about the irreversible path and, instead, focus exclusively on the initial and final end states. You must separate the system from the surroundings, and then devise an alternative reversible path for each of them separately that takes each from its initial state to its final state. You did that correctly for the system, and determined its correct entropy change (-7.62 J/K). This is the entropy change for the system both for the reversible path you devised as well as for the actual irreversible path.
In the case of the surroundings, during the irreversible process, its internal energy increased by 3.741 kJ at the constant temperature of 300 K. So, for its alternative reversible path, to achieve this same internal energy change at 300 K, the amount of reversible heat it would have to absorb would be the same 3.741 kJ. So, the change in entropy of the surroundings in the irreversible process was 12.47 J/K.
I know that this might all sound a little confusing. So here is a more detailed explanation of the fundamentals as well as a cookbook (foolproof) recipe for determining the change in entropy of the system and surroundings for any arbitrary irreversible process on a closed system (including worked examples of the methodology): https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/grandpa-chets-entropy-recipe/
answered Apr 3 at 17:13
Chet MillerChet Miller
6,5261513
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You are confused about how to calculate the entropy change for a system and surroundings that have experienced an irreversible process. For the irreversible path, you correctly calculated the final state using the first law of thermodynamics. From this point on, you must totally forget about the irreversible path and, instead, focus exclusively on the initial and final end states. You must separate the system from the surroundings, and then devise an alternative reversible path for each of them separately that takes each from its initial state to its final state. You did that correctly for the system, and determined its correct entropy change (-7.62 J/K). This is the entropy change for the system both for the reversible path you devised as well as for the actual irreversible path.
In the case of the surroundings, during the irreversible process, its internal energy increased by 3.741 kJ at the constant temperature of 300 K. So, for its alternative reversible path, to achieve this same internal energy change at 300 K, the amount of reversible heat it would have to absorb would be the same 3.741 kJ. So, the change in entropy of the surroundings in the irreversible process was 12.47 J/K.
I know that this might all sound a little confusing. So here is a more detailed explanation of the fundamentals as well as a cookbook (foolproof) recipe for determining the change in entropy of the system and surroundings for any arbitrary irreversible process on a closed system (including worked examples of the methodology): https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/grandpa-chets-entropy-recipe/
answered Apr 3 at 17:13
Chet MillerChet Miller
6,5261513
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You are confused about how to calculate the entropy change for a system and surroundings that have experienced an irreversible process. For the irreversible path, you correctly calculated the final state using the first law of thermodynamics. From this point on, you must totally forget about the irreversible path and, instead, focus exclusively on the initial and final end states. You must separate the system from the surroundings, and then devise an alternative reversible path for each of them separately that takes each from its initial state to its final state. You did that correctly for the system, and determined its correct entropy change (-7.62 J/K). This is the entropy change for the system both for the reversible path you devised as well as for the actual irreversible path.
In the case of the surroundings, during the irreversible process, its internal energy increased by 3.741 kJ at the constant temperature of 300 K. So, for its alternative reversible path, to achieve this same internal energy change at 300 K, the amount of reversible heat it would have to absorb would be the same 3.741 kJ. So, the change in entropy of the surroundings in the irreversible process was 12.47 J/K.
I know that this might all sound a little confusing. So here is a more detailed explanation of the fundamentals as well as a cookbook (foolproof) recipe for determining the change in entropy of the system and surroundings for any arbitrary irreversible process on a closed system (including worked examples of the methodology): https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/grandpa-chets-entropy-recipe/
answered Apr 3 at 17:13
Chet MillerChet Miller
6,5261513
$endgroup$
You are confused about how to calculate the entropy change for a system and surroundings that have experienced an irreversible process. For the irreversible path, you correctly calculated the final state using the first law of thermodynamics. From this point on, you must totally forget about the irreversible path and, instead, focus exclusively on the initial and final end states. You must separate the system from the surroundings, and then devise an alternative reversible path for each of them separately that takes each from its initial state to its final state. You did that correctly for the system, and determined its correct entropy change (-7.62 J/K). This is the entropy change for the system both for the reversible path you devised as well as for the actual irreversible path.
In the case of the surroundings, during the irreversible process, its internal energy increased by 3.741 kJ at the constant temperature of 300 K. So, for its alternative reversible path, to achieve this same internal energy change at 300 K, the amount of reversible heat it would have to absorb would be the same 3.741 kJ. So, the change in entropy of the surroundings in the irreversible process was 12.47 J/K.
I know that this might all sound a little confusing. So here is a more detailed explanation of the fundamentals as well as a cookbook (foolproof) recipe for determining the change in entropy of the system and surroundings for any arbitrary irreversible process on a closed system (including worked examples of the methodology): https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/grandpa-chets-entropy-recipe/
answered Apr 3 at 17:13
Chet MillerChet Miller
6,5261513
answered Apr 3 at 17:13
Chet MillerChet Miller
6,5261513
answered Apr 3 at 17:13
Chet MillerChet Miller
6,5261513
answered Apr 3 at 17:13
Chet MillerChet Miller
6,5261513
6,5261513
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Chemistry Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f112088%2fcalculating-entropy-change-reversible-vs-irreversible-process%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Update: I am starting to get the feeling that (somehow) the final state of the surroundings after an irreversible process is not the same as the final state of the surroundings after a reversible process. Something (for example, friction between the piston and walls of container) make the final states of surroundings different for irreversible vs reversible --> change in S is not the same. However, since the initial and final T and V are the same for the system in reversible and irreversible, the change in entropy is the same for reversible vs irreversible for system. Is this a valid argument?
$endgroup$
– Ethiopius
Apr 3 at 17:09
1
$begingroup$
Entropy change of your system will be the same for both the reversible and irreversible path. However, the entropy of the surroundings will not be the same , as you have seen. The system goes from the same state A to the same state B for both the reversible and irreversible paths, the surroundings are not in the same state after an irreversible process as they would be after a reversible one. @Ethiopius
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
Apr 3 at 17:31
1
$begingroup$
@Tyberius What you mean is that the surroundings are not in the same state after an irreversible process imposed on the system as they would be after a reversible process imposed on the system between its same two end states.
$endgroup$
– Chet Miller
Apr 3 at 23:01
1
$begingroup$
@ChetMiller That is a clearer description. The way I had phrased I was open to misinterpretation.
$endgroup$
– Tyberius
Apr 3 at 23:03