Last night, you presented on a chapter of Robert Crease's book, The Great Equations.
All work must be made as comments to this blog post.
---------
A. Each team will provide one response to the appropriate question below (between 300-400 words).
During class, you will present your response to your peers.
Due online Sunday, 11/18/2012 at/before at 9:00 PM
How is the nature of the atom as developed over time related to kinetic molecular theory and the Second Law of Thermodynamics?
What empirical evidence do we have that the Shrodinger Equation is a reasonably accurate model?
What is the connection between the phenomenon of relativity and the interchangeability of matter and energy? What are some practical applications of the equation?
Explain why a Newtonian model of the atom (with circulating electrons around a central nucleus) cannot be explained using Newton's Laws.
B. Each team member will provide a comment and at least two questions to one of the explanations.
Responses are due by noon on/before Monday, 11/26/12.
Comments and questions must be meaningful in scope and must reflect the discussion presented by your peers.-----------
FINAL WORK: Nov 29, 2012
Please provide a scientific explanation to the questions below as a response to the blog post by your peer (200 words or more). Please cite your credible, reliable sources.
Some questions were split into two parts for clarity.
Also, do not assume that the way that a question is worded means that it is correct.
Did the second law of
thermodynamics disprove the first one? (I kind of think it did, but please explain
how) Hailey
"Thermodynamics uses energy
in the form of work to convert colder matter to warmer matter...." so in
its simplest form, would this be like a microwave? Kelly
How are electrons everywhere at
once, yet we can determine where they are using Schrodinger's equation? Are
they only everywhere in certain orbitals? Brianna
How does Newton's law of motion
apply to Rutherford's gold foil experiment? I feel like there is a strong
connection with how the alpha particles reacted when hitting the gold foil and
Newton's law of motion. Maggie O’
What exactly does it mean by the
entropy striving towards a maximum? Is there a maximum entropy? Jill
How are potential energy and
kinetic energy of elements related to the first and second laws of
thermodynamics? Madison
What are some real world
applications of thermodynamics? Missy
Why doesn't it [gravity] account
for the effect of attraction between the protons and the electrons? Sara
Do electrons change in speed or remain at a constant moving speed? Casey C
What exactly is the concept of
invariance? Does that mean that a moving object is never constant like the
speed of light? Siobhan
The equation [E=mc2] is
still a little confusing. Alexis
Why is the c squared?
Casey B
Why can't an object reach the
speed of light? Nicole
What happens when the world
reaches maximum entropy? Can it? Clay
What do you mean by this: “Atoms
use energy to combine with other atoms”? Tynishia
What do you mean when you say
atoms become more “disorganized” when they speed up? Are you referring to their
motion? Maci
What exactly are the
"electrostatic forces" that are providing the attraction between the
nucleus and electrons? Tarver
Schrodingers Equation can be solved and applied in several ways. To me, a solution of an equation is proof of it’s accuracy. When doing it “by hand” Dr. McGill shared that it can only be solved for Hydrogen. Although many scientists have tried (and even spent a lifetime) none have yet solved Schrodinger’s Equation for other elements. It can be solved using a computer for other elements. It is reasonable accurate because we have the technology to compute things. If we were students 50 years ago and still had a professor like Dr. McGill, we could solve it by hand with him and reasonably predict the behavior of atoms, based on our calculations. Luckily, we have a sure and safe way by using computers.
ReplyDeleteWhen looking at Schrodinger’s Equation it assists scientists at predicting where an electron might potentially be at, at any given time. We know through current revelations in science that we can not find the exact location of an electron in an atom. We might be able to find the electron but as soon as we find the said electron it has already moved again, and we continue our search. However, when Schrodingers equation is applied to this theory it helps us predict where the electron might be within the atom’s electron cloud.
Essentially, the only empirical evidence that exists to this day of Schrodinger's Equation is multiple scientists attempts to solve it over time. And their ability to use what they have to predict the presence of certain electrons at certain points proves its accuracy to the best of anyone's knowledge and attempts thus far. Until proven otherwise, scientists will continue to attempt to solve what is thought to be an unsolvable problem, just as they will continue to use what they do know about it to predict the location of electrons.
It is crazy to me that scientists have spent a lifetime trying to solve Schrodinger's Equation by hand for other elements but have only been able to solve it for Hydrogen. It reminds me of some of the models we talked about in class and how we can predict where an atom is when it "jumps" orbitals. It also reminds me of the article, "The Value of Not Knowing" that we read and discussed. This equation, even though no one has completely solved it, still has value in not knowing the finished product. This can be relevant in the middle grades classroom because as teachers we will not know everything and we should strive to teach our students that there is value in not having all of the answers.
Delete1) Why is knowing the position of electron important? What is important about that knowledge?
Delete2) Why can the equation only be solved by a computer for atoms other than hydrogen? Shouldn't it be solvable by hand as well? Or is it just too long and time consuming?
Here are scientist who have spent decades solving an equation by hand and to only find the answer for one element. To see our technology today and how much it has evolved and see how it can advance our knowledge is crazy! I think it's interesting how you called a computer, "sure and safe." I believe our generation has become so dependent on computers and technology and have lost the motivation to go into a library and read the books these scientist have written about these equations. I believe we can learn so much by diving into books. As Jill said I believe this also reminds me of the article, "The Value of Not Knowing" the idea of how great it is to not know something in order to want to find out the why. Scientist are continuing their sense of not knowing to further their research on Schrodinger's equation.
Delete1. How accurate has Schrodinger's equation been in finding the electrons future location?
2. You said that this equation was the closet to helping find the electron is. Have any other equations evolved to help Schrodinger's equation?
I find it both intriguing as well as unsettling that we, as a scientific society, still accept an equation that seems "unsolvable". If a computer can solve Schrodinger's equation for one element, why not others? Perhaps it is not applicable to other elements?
DeleteI do think that it's interesting that we can use an equation to predict where an electron might be. It makes me feel secure in the sense that these elements are predictable. With the knowledge that electrons have a specific set of behaviors, we can formulate and hypothesize that electrons might act this way in other elements as well. My thoughts are simply that a different equation may be needed for each individual element. Within each each element is a different composition of neutrons, protons, and electrons - therefore, each element will have unique charges and forces acting upon it.
1. How do we know that Schrodinger's equation can be applied to other elements, besides Hydrogen?
2. Does Schrodinger's equation predict where the electron was, is, or will be (past, present, future)? Does it matter?
A Newtonian model of the atom (with circulating electrons around a central nucleus) cannot be explained using Newton’s Laws.
ReplyDeleteThe mass number of an atom includes only the number of protons and neutrons, not the electrons, because the protons and neutrons provide most of the atom’s mass. The force of gravity is a force exerted on two objects by their mass and the inverse of the square of the distance between them. It does not account for the attraction for the sub-particles of an atom. Since Newton’s law of gravity states the following formula: Fg= Gm1m2/ r^2, there is a problem with applying it to an atom where the mass of the electron is almost negligible. If you substitute “0” for the mass of the electron, the formula will produce a “0” for the force of gravity. Electrostatic forces provide the attraction, rather than gravity. The electrons that are closer to the nucleus are attracted more strongly than those that are further away.
Electrons exhibit both particle and wave properties, but we do not know for certain where the electrons are at any time. Electrons are not in fixed orbits, but rather have wavelike properties according to quantum physics. They are everywhere at once. The distance between the nucleus and the electron is therefore not fixed (besides an electron can move between orbitals), causing additional issues with applying the gravitational formula to an atom.
Newton’s laws of motion state that an object moves in the direction in which it is pushed and that it will keep moving in a straight line until some other force acts to slow or deflect it. If an object is moving, it continues to move without turning or changing its speed. The problem with applying the laws of motion is that electrons do not have a starting or resting point; they are continuously in motion. Electrons will never have zero energy. Newton’s law of motion implies that an electron would not be able to orbit the nucleus without running out of energy and falling into the nucleus. It also would not continue on a straight path and fly off into space. His laws of motion do not account for the effect of the force of attraction between the positively charged protons and the negatively charged electrons.
I find it interesting that the electrostatic forces are what attracts the electrons rather than gravity. I guess from understanding the concept that the gravity is what forces us to not float in the air, I would assume the same would be for atoms. I also thought the fact that things are not fixed just like Shrodingers equation, causing further complications in the equation.
Delete1. Why doesn't it account for the effect of attraction between the protons and the electrons?
2. Do electrons change in speed or remain at a constant moving speed?
1) How are electrons everywhere at once, yet we can determine where they are using Schrodinger's equation? Are they only everywhere in certain orbitals?
Delete2) How does Newton's law of motion apply to Rutherford's gold foil experiment? I feel like there is a strong connection with how the alpha particles reacted when hitting the gold foil and Newton's law of motion.
The first thing that puzzled me is that I thought you would able to explain Newton's model of an atom with Newton's laws, but we cannot. Also, electrons are not included in the mass of an object. If we were to include them, how would this change the mass of objects and also, how would it affect the relationship gravity has on that object? This topic brings up a lot of questions and ideas.
Delete1. I wonder how Newton's formula would change if the attraction for the sub-particles were taken into account? Would those particles increase or decrease the gravity?
2. What exactly are the "electrostatic forces" that are providing the attraction between the nucleus and electrons?
1. What causes the electrons that are closer to the nucleus to be attracted more strongly than ones that are further away?
Delete2. How can electrons be 'everywhere at once'?
Electrons can act as particles and waves. We discussed that how we view this is based on what were were looking for when we observe them. Could the same situation be true for our ideas on where the electron might be located?
DeleteWhat exactly are the "electrostatic forces" that are providing the attraction between the nucleus and electrons?
DeleteElectrostatic forces, as defined by Coulumbs law, the law of physics that aims to describe the electrostatic interaction between two or more electrically charged particles. The law, developed in 1785 looks to describe the reason or attraction or repulsion between matter, and the core of the reason for this repulsion or attraction stems for the core of the matter, the atoms and the charges those atoms posses. “The weakness of electrostatic forces between different everyday objects reflects the fact that matter consists of almost exactly equal numbers of positively charged protons and negatively
charged electrons thoroughly intermingled with one another, mainly in the form of atoms whose electrons move around positively charged nuclei consisting of protons and neutrons” essentially meaning that the amount of attraction, or repulsion, is the result of the amount of, as well as placement, of proton, neutrons and electrons within a particular atom. To answer the question as simply as possible, the “forces” are those that stem for the placement of the electrons, protons and neutrons and their pull that they have as it relates to their position, as well as the opposing force they are either repelling or attracting. In my placement we recently discussed what it means to repel and attract, so to be encountered with a question like this required me to take my thinking in the classroom I teach in and relate it to the atom and the electromagnetic and electrostatic forces it contains.
http://groups.physics.northwestern.edu/lab/DOWNLOAD/electrostatics.pdf (my source)
DeleteDo electrons change in speed or remain at a constant moving speed?
DeleteElectrons do not follow defined orbitals as Bohr had proposed in his atomic model. Instead atoms exhibit both particle and wave properties. The wave properties imply that the electrons “adopt various states, or orbitals, each with a different fuzzy outline and energy” (Sih, 2012). “Most of the time, an electron bound to an atom sits in an unchanging energy state” (Battersby, 2012). Something must act on the atom to excite the electron to move from one energy level, or orbital, to another. Electromagnetic charges, vibrations, and the formation of bonds are some of the forces that cause the electrons to become excited and jump from one energy level to the next. “The velocity, acceleration and path type of the electron will be different for electrons at different position(s), time and temperature in the atom since electrons are known to occupy different orbits depending on shell-type that would vary from atom to atom” (Sih, 2012).
Electrons move at the speed of an attosecond (billionths of a billionth of a second). Electrons in a hydrogen atom move rapidly at 2.188×108cm/s. The electron velocity can change by one order of magnitude, depending on the activated energy state of the atom. Movements of the electrons are highest near the outer rim (Sih, 2012). Therefore an electron’s speed is determined by various factors. It can remain constant, but it can also change speed depending on those factors mentioned above.
Works Cited
Battersby, Stephen. "The Flash." New Scientist 211.2831 (2011): 46-49. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Dec. 2012.
G.C., Sih. "Signatures Of Rapid Movement Of Electrons In Valence Band Region: Interdependence Of Position, Time And Temperature." Theoretical And Applied Fracture Mechanics 45.(n.d.): 1-12. ScienceDirect. Web. 3 Dec. 2012.
I suspect that the question was based on the notion of the electron "racing" around an energy levels like that proposed in the Bohr model. Therefore, do they move at a constant speed or does the speed change (accelerate/deccelerate) or is the speed zero (stop)? Does the Newtonian model of a particle moving contantly without force support the Bohr model of the electron in motion?
DeleteWhen determining what this “celebrity equation” was all about, we discovered that we did not know what this equation means in its simplest terms. After researching and investigating this equation even further, we are now able to some-what explain the components of this equation and why it is so important that we understand it.
ReplyDeleteEinstein’s Theory of relativity explains that there is no such thing as absolute speed, time, or position. How would you know you were moving if you were in the middle of outer space? Well, the only way to know if you are moving is to see something else in outer space that may or may not be moving. The theory of relativity states that all things can be thought of in reference to something else. Therefore, wanting to know an object’s speed or position at any given time would vary because of the different perspectives and reference frames that are associated with that particular object. The theory of relativity also states that everything in the universe moves in relation to the speed of light. Even though it may look like it, an object never passes the speed of light. A moving object may approach but will never exceed the speed of light (The concept of invariance). The speed of light is constant.
So, essentially mass and energy are identical. Matter can be converted into energy and energy can be converted to matter. Mass contains energy and energy follows a certain set of rules outlined in the theory of relativity. Therefore, mass has the potential to function at a "relative" level - fitting in with the whole idea of particles acting like waves and vice versa. Practical applications include identifying unstable elements as elements that continuously convert mass to energy. We see this conversion of mass into energy in nuclear reactions and is the basics behind nuclear weapons. Through use of E=mc2 we can calculate how much energy to account for.
Personally, I find the Theory of Relativity to be incredibly interesting, but also very relatable. I like to think about it as it relates to driving a car. During the day I'm aware of my surrounds, and feel as if I'm moving slower because I can see my surroundings outside the windows. But at night, I can be going to same exact speed and feel as if I'm moving at a normal speed, and it might be faster, or slower, but I just feel as if I'm unaware of how I'm moving because I'm unable to see as far ahead.
Delete1. Why is E=MC(squared) such a recognizable formula?
2. Why can't an object reach the speed of light?
I can relate to this theory as well. I am all the time speeding in my car because when I look out the front window I feel like I am going so slow, but when I'm a passenger I feel like we are in a jet. This may be because I have no control over the speed when I am the passenger, but most of the time when I feel like we are flying we are actually going slower than what I would be driving.
DeleteWhat are your questions, Brianna?
Delete1) What about how electrons move? Do they move faster than the speed of light? They have to be moving extremely fast but are they going faster than light?
Delete2) Also based on Newton's theory of motion, how does the speed of light remain constant? Why wouldn't it ever slow down?
When looking at this equation before, I never knew that this equation was linked to speed. I like how Tarver and Brianna related this theory to cars. I also think when I am driving a car at 65 miles per hour and a car zooms past me, I start thinking of how fast that car must be going. If I am going 65, that car must be going around 80 miles per hour. This theory is very relatable and useful when considering speed, mass, and energy.
Delete1. What exactly is the concept of invariance? Does that mean that a moving object is never constant like the speed of light?
2. The equation is still a little confusing. Why is the c squared?
Good narrative on the response, team.
Delete-----
Concerning comments: there is still quite a bit of confusion in the comments. E represents energy, m represents mass, and c² is a very large number. The mass of a body is a measure of its energy content; mass is a property of all energy, and energy is a property of all mass, and the two properties are connected by a constant, in this case, c².
Why is the c squared?
Delete-There was a more simple equation before E=MC(^2) which was E=mv1. An a previous experiment done by Willem 'sGravesande showed that if a weight was dropped into soft clay it was sink, the idea was that the object, if flung down at twice the speed, would sink twice as much. When the experiment was conducted the object sunk four times as deep and if flung down thrice as hard it would sink nine times as deep into the soft clay. This had the scientists in 18th century confused hence the need for a new equation in which the velocity was squared and not doubled. Einstein then happened upon the research of Voltaire and Du Châtelet on Willem 'sGravesande’s experiment, he figured out that the speed of light was the velocity needed to bridge the gap between energy and mass. Therefore, “c” is a necessity in the equation because the idea of velocity alone did not bridge the gap between energy and mass. Also, whenever a part of matter is converted into pure energy it is moving at the speed of light by the definition of the equation. “C” must be squared because the velocity does not double or triple it is the square of whatever force is put behind the original velocity of the object.
Resources:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/ancestors-einstein.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/education/activities/pdf/3213_einstein_04.pdf
Good research, CaseyB. A question that bothers me is if the velocity has both direction and size, why would c that has only size be a bettter value for this equation? And if it does not, why not?
DeleteOur article showed how the process of creating the second law of thermodynamics was constantly changing over time when new theories, observations, and experiments were done. This was just like in learning the nature of the atom how the many different theories changed over time with new information. Thermodynamics was dynamic in itself the way it was being formed. It changed from the caloric theory where heat was a force that was an invisible and weightless liquid. From there it changed into the idea of the transfer of heat between systems. Heat is only one type of energy. Kinetic molecular theory claims that atoms and molecules have a kinetic energy of motion meaning atoms are constantly in motion. These motions can be measured as temperature. When the temperature of the matter in a system increases, it will gain more kinetic energy and the atoms will speed up. This is because of some work being put into the system. When the atoms speed up, they can become more disorganized. This disorganization can be renamed as entropy. Entropy can be measured according to the second law of thermodynamics which states the entropy of the world strives towards a maximum. When we have a system of water that is frozen and add energy to the system in the form of heat, the atoms speed up. When the atoms increase in energy, the matter also increases in entropy. So when water moves from its frozen state to a liquid state, the entropy of the water has increased. The entropy can be increased even more by adding more energy to the system and causing the liquid water to turn into water vapor. The atoms in a gas state have more freedom to move causing the higher level of entropy. It also can be related to how both thermodynamics and atoms use energy. Atoms use energy to combine with other atoms and the quantum leap of electrons to different orbitals. Thermodynamics uses energy in the form of work to convert colder matter to warmer matter where the freedom of molecules, energy released, makes the entropy of the world that pushes toward a maximum.
ReplyDeleteYour explanation of heat, kinetic energy that matter possesses, and entropy flowed well and provided me with a visual to actually see the process occur. What I find interesting about the laws of thermodynamics is how simply they are introduced to students studying physical science and how complex the laws can really get. Many of the concepts of thermodynamics, I remember going over in high school physical science, but I guess things can get kind of cloudy as we try to put things into perspective.
Delete1) May be a silly question, but I'll ask it anyway :-)
Did the second law of thermodynamics disprove the first one? (I kind of think it did, but please explain how)
2) "Thermodynamics uses energy in the form of work to convert colder matter to warmer matter...." so in its simpliest form, would this be like a microwave?
1) What exactly does it mean by the entropy striving towards a maximum? Is there a maximum entropy?
Delete2) How are potential energy and kinetic energy of elements related to the first and second laws of thermodynamics?
It’s interesting that many laws of physical science are intertwined and relate to each other. I would not have initially thought about the behavior of atoms being related to thermodynamics, but you did a good job of connecting them. What were once considered basic truths or laws can change over time as we have seen with the theories about atoms and thermodynamics.
Delete1. What do you mean when you say atoms become more “disorganized” when they speed up? Are you referring to their motion?
2. What happens when the world reaches maximum entropy? Can it?
3. What do you mean by this: “Atoms use energy to combine with other atoms”?
When reading the article and trying to explain what happened that created the second law of thermodynamics I realized that all science is evolving. I still may not know all of the circumstances that surrounds the law but I understand that the ideas changed due to new information. Thermodynamics is confusing due to the idea the disorder is what the world is striving towards. Most humans want order in life because that is what makes sense to us but the world does not want order. Even though order occurs it is still trying to become disordered because that means the molecules of the universe are free to move around. Just as I want freedom to relax and do as I please so do molecules and that is what this article really made me understand.
DeleteCaseyB: Please provide your questions. Elaborate on the "I realized that all science is evolving" comment.
DeleteQuestions
Delete1.) Can we see everything through the eyes that science is constantly changing due to new information, is science ever static?
2.) Why do humans strive for order when the world strives to become more disordered?
Science is evolving- I just see that science changes and becomes something better than its original self. Parts of the original idea remain but the idea has mutated in order to survive the new data that has been presented.
Why can't an object reach the speed of light?
DeleteLight itself has no mass; that is why it is able to travel faster than other object. It is a rule of physics that nothing can have move faster than the speed of light because it requires an infinite amount of energy. Electrons have mass, although it is an extremely small mass, therefore they cannot exceed the speed of light. They have gotten electrons to move very close to the speed of light, .999999 times the speed of light. But because the electron has mass, it cannot move faster than light. Although scientists claim that they have had objects moving faster than the speed of light, in actuality it is just a question of optics, rather than disproving relativity. Einstein proved that the speed of light is constant, and this is true in a vacuum. He also showed how distance and time are not fixed; rather, they are relative. Because though Einstein showed how that as an object increases in mass as it increases in speed, more energy is required, leading to an infinite amount of energy needed to increase an object past the speed of light, making it virtually impossible. We can make objects like subatomic particles get close to the speed of light, but the idea of having objects exceed the speed of light causes a breakdown in causality. “Schneider uses an example of hitting a target with a gun that shoots bullets faster than the speed of light. ‘Some observers would see the bullet hit the target before they saw the shooter fire the gun,’ he said. ‘Since one of the guiding principles of relativity is that all physical laws are the same to all observers, this violation of causality would be a big problem’" (http://phys.org/news12084.html)
Resources:
http://helios.gsfc.nasa.gov/qa_gp_sl.html
http://phys.org/news12084.html
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteTynishia:
DeleteConsider integrating endothermicity and exothermicity into your response. How is endothermic and exothermic related to your question?
First, I think it’s important to note that the atoms can be combined by either gaining or losing electrons. The process of electrons being shared or removed are known as Covalent and Ionic bonding. I have always been taught that elements are constantly trying to reach stability. This is the reason why we are able to observe only some elements as they appear on the periodic table. Being unstable means that the outer energy level is not holding all the electrons that it could possible hold. To become stable, electrons will need to be gained or lost. To gain or lose electrons could result in moving from one orbital to the next for some elements. When I think about it, it makes sense that elements that lose electrons do so because energy is not necessary for this to occur. However, to gain electrons energy is needed.
DeleteWhen you think of atoms using energy, think about if this way, if you were an electron of an atom hanging out in an orbital that was close to the nucleus, it would take a lot of energy to excite you and move you a different orbital. This is what Nicole means by quantum leaps of electrons. Think about the visual Dr. Deneroff and Dr. Richards did for us in class with the keys and the chair.
As far as the energy needed to transform ice cubes into liquid water and liquid water into vapor (as referenced in Nicole’s response), the concepts of endothermicity and exothermicity come into plan. “All chemical reactions start with the reactants having some sort of energy activation that results in the bonding of the two material's molecules and forms a new product.”
The process of releasing or gaining energy is known as endothermicity and exothermicity. In order to melt an ice cube, the bonds in the water would need to be broken. To break this bond, energy needs to be absorbed. The process or reaction that absorbs energy in the form of heat is known as an endothermic reaction. Likewise, to freeze water, energy needs to be released. Energy in the form of heat is released into the environment. This is known as an exothermic reaction.
http://www.physics4kids.com/files/thermo_intro.html
http://mysite.pratt.edu/~arch543p/readings/thermodynamics.html#2
http://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=523
http://www.helium.com/items/1108222-chemical-reactionsendothermicexothermicreactants
As I indicated last week, I suspect that the original question was about chemical reactions, that is, how atoms combine and why is energy involved and how are electrons involved.
DeleteSo the notion of endothermicity and exothermicity are relevant. I was pointing you to energy gain/loss to see if that might steer you to thinking about how electrons might be involved. Some parts are there (you mentioned valence electrons, and bonds, etc.). How might valence electrons play a role in endo- or exothermic reactions?
It's really valuable for us to take into consideration that although many scientific theories feel as if they are fact, they do have potential to change. This second law of thermodynamics is an exemplary case of just that!
ReplyDelete1. How does the second law of thermodynamics relate to the other laws of thermodynamics?
2. What are some real world applications of thermodynamics?
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIt is not clear from your post how your examples are real world applications of the law. You will need to specifically identify how each example is an application of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics which means defining the law in terms of the application.
DeleteMaggie: You indicated at the beginning of your presentation to scientists that you understood the value of being open to ideas. Communicating that dispositional change did not go un-noticed.
DeleteWhat are some real world applications of thermodynamics?
DeleteIn order to find some real world applications of thermodynamics, I first want to define what the second law of thermodynamics is. According to one source, the second law of thermodynamics is "In all energy exchanges, if no energy enters or leaves the system, the potential energy of the state will always be less than that of the initial state. This is also commonly referred to as entropy”. When searching for real world applications of thermodynamics, I came across a couple examples that were repeated. The most common example that came up was about the refrigerator. Most assume that a refrigerator creates cold air on the inside. This is not true. A refrigerator removes the warm air from a refrigerator through the back. This is why many times you feel air blowing out through the bottom of a refrigerator. This is an example of thermodynamics because generally energy does not flow from a cold region to a hot one. The work being done here is due to thermodynamics. Another example that was mentioned was about the air conditioner. This example uses the same concept of thermodynamics as the refrigerator. The air conditioner uses the same concept as the refrigerator does to remove the warm air from the room. The air conditioner uses a coolant to cool the air before releasing it back into the room. A different source talks about how a frying pan can be a good illustration of thermodynamics. A frying pan is heated on the stove when it is used for cooking. When a frying pan is removed from the stove, it begins to cool down. It cools down because the heat is flowing out to the surrounding room. The energy is flowing out and being dispersed which happens according to thermodynamics. As future teachers, I think it is important for us to discover ways to explain thermodynamics to kids. One source talked about how you can explain the second law of thermodynamics as a child’s room. When you clean your room, it always has a tendency to become messy again. The disorder in a child’s room tends to always come back. This is thermodynamics because ”As the disorder in the universe increases, the energy is transformed into less usable forms.” These were some of the examples and applications I found for thermodynamics.
Sources:
http://www.kids.esdb.bg/basic_principles.html
http://secondlaw.oxy.edu/two.html
http://www.scienceclarified.com/everyday/Real-Life-Physics-Vol-2/Thermodynamics-Real-life-applications.html
http://www.emc.maricopa.edu/faculty/farabee/biobk/biobookener1.html
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHow are potential energy and kinetic energy of elements related to the first and second laws of thermodynamics?
ReplyDeleteOver time we have learned what Potential and Kinetic energy are, but how are they related to the first and second law of thermodynamics? Potential energy can relate to the first law of thermodynamics because the first law talks about conservation of energy. How energy is always changing from form to the next but it is being conserved. Potential energy is the energy being stored. The energy waiting there to be changed into another form at one point. In the second law of thermodynamics potential energy is stored until used but if the potential energy is not used its energy state is lower than when it was at its initial state.
Kinetic energy can relate to the first law because when the energy is changing it’s in motion. Any energy in motion or in use is kinetic energy. So when the energy is changing, but it cannot be created nor destroyed it is kinetic energy. It is always converted from one form to another. Kinetic energy can also be related to the second law of thermodynamics because energy changing is kinetic energy. Energy exchanging is changing and the energy being changed is kinetic energy. It has been said that the flow of energy maintains order and life.
Did the second law of thermodynamics disprove the first one? (I kind of think it did, but please explain how)
ReplyDeleteThe first law of thermodynamics states that the energy of a system remains constant. Therefore, it doesn't change. The equation states that the amount of energy going in is equal to the heat, but then when you subtract the work of the system, nothing has been gained and nothing has been lost. Therefore energy cannot be created or destroyed. It is just being changed into different forms of that same energy.
When looking at the second law of thermodynamics states that the system is trying to reach equilibrium. The measure of thermal energy never decreases because they are constantly trying to reach equilibrium within itself. If nothing enters or leaves the system then the energy is going to be less than its original amount (entropy).
So in looking to see if the second law disputes the first law I would have to agree. The first law states the the energy remains constant, the value of that energy decreases. Useable energy is decreasing and unusable is increasing causing entropy. The first law states that energy is remaining constant but the second realizes that in reality over time it is decreasing. So, yes, the first law has some validity, but once the second law was created it in turn conflicts with the first law.
Sources:
http://www.allaboutscience.org/second-law-of-thermodynamics.htm
http://www.emc.maricopa.edu/faculty/farabee/biobk/biobookener1.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics
What exactly does it mean by the entropy striving towards a maximum? Is there a maximum entropy?
ReplyDeleteEntropy is an extensive thermodynamic property that is the measure of a system’s thermal energy per unit temperature that is unavailable for doing useful work. The energy of the world is constant; therefore the entropy is trying to reach a maximum with that constant. When more order is created in a system, the entropy is always striving towards a maximum. In thermally isolated systems, entropy runs in one direction only, therefore we must keep in mind that entropy is not a reversible process. The energy of the world is constant, so entropy is always striving towards a maximum. We have no way to know what the “maximum” entropy is in a system. We can’t measure all of the energy of the world, so we cannot know what the maximum would be. Ice melting in a room is a common example of increasing the entropy of a system. Just like in our ice lab, we started off with a system, which was ice in a beaker. In order to increase the entropy in that system, we had to create disorder through heat. By heating up the ice, disorder was created because the compact systems of the ice molecules were becoming disorganized.
"Rader's PHYSICS 4 KIDS.COM." Rader's PHYSICS 4 KIDS.COM. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2012. .
"Unit 3 - Elaboration - Enthalpy, Entropy and Free Energy." Unit 3 - Elaboration - Enthalpy, Entropy and Free Energy. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2012.
I liked that you introduced the example of the ice melting in the lab but it was unclear after the definitions, how it was connected. So a good skill is to take the definitions and convert them into what you think they mean in terms of the query asked. As is, the information above is a combination of web-based definitions and makes it difficult for the reader to understand the question being answered.
DeleteSchrodinger’s equation does not tell you where the electron is. Schrodinger’s equation tells you the probability of where the electron may be at a given time. The equation is based on quantum mechanics/physics. Quantum mechanics/physics is the branch of mechanics that deals with the mathematical description of the motion and interaction of subatomic particles. This is where the quantum leap comes from. The quantum leap is the electron moving from orbital to orbital, but in Schrodinger’s model the orbitals are no longer nice and round as in the models before. Schrodinger said the electron was confined in a volume of space. The electron is confined because of the relationship the electron has with the nucleus. So technically the electron is not everywhere at once, it is in certain places at certain times. At some times the electron is more likely to be in one place than another. For example, if an electron was watching the super bowl at your house the electron would most likely be in your living room on the couch during the game. You would not know exactly where at in your living room, but the electron would have the highest probability of being in there than in the garage.
ReplyDelete"Schrödinger's Equation - What Does It Mean?" Schrödinger's Equation. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2012. .
"Quantum Mechanics." Quantum Mechanics. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2012. .
What do you mean when you say atoms become more “disorganized” when they speed up? Are you referring to their motion?
ReplyDeleteThe second law of thermodynamics focuses on entropy, which is the energy that is unable to be transformed into work. Some energy is lost any time that work is done. The idea of high entropy refers to randomness and disorder. A portion of the energy that is used to lead to a decrease in entropy is released in the progression through heat and sound. This could correlate with friction which could release heat and various energies. The second law of thermodynamics states that without a source of energy working in a situation, the molecules will eventually become more random and less organized.
While observing the atoms, we are aware that all matter is defined by being a solid, a gas, a liquid or plasma. Ice is very structured compared to water which is less structured. These two phases (water and ice) still have the same bonds. Although these bonds are alike, they become more disorganized as they heat up. In this process, ice can be heated which leads to an increase in temperature and breaking apart. The chemical structure in this situation is becoming more disorganized. When ice becomes water, there is more motion and less organization. When this water is further heated, it will become a gas which represents even more randomness.
Sources:
http://www.edinformatics.com/math_science/states_of_matter.htm
http://www.aboundingjoy.com/2ndlaw-fs.html
What exactly is the concept of invariance? Does that mean that a moving object is never constant like the speed of light?
ReplyDeleteInvariance is the idea that we each have individual frames of reference. When you are sitting in a parked car in a parking lot, and the car next to you starts moving, you automatically slam on your brakes…even though your car is in park. From your perspective you were moving, not the other car. To take this one step further: Have you ever been on one of the tracks at an airport? It is like an escalator, except flat. Let’s say that the track is moving at 5 mph. You walk on it at a speed of 3 mph. From your perspective, you are only walking at a speed of 3 mph. However, from an outsider’s view you are moving at a speed of 8 mph. Both answers are right. You are moving at both 3 mph AND 8 mph. It simply depends upon who we are trusting as the judge. Which factors are we taking into account? Invariance is the term used to describe this disconnect between frames of reference.
It is not about the fact that moving objects can’t move at a constant speed; invariance addresses the concept that the constant speed will depend upon which lens we choose to look thorugh.
http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/lecture1.htm
Because of the gold foil experiment, Rutherford was able to publish a new atomic theory that described the atom as having a central nucleus that is positive while being surrounded by negative electrons.
ReplyDeleteWhy doesn't it [gravity] account for the effect of attraction between the protons and the electrons?
ReplyDeleteThere is a lot of controversy surrounding this questions. Because of the positive and negative charges, it is hard to define whether they are affected by gravity or not. Through research I have found that it has to do with the e/m (the ratio of charge to mass). Because gravity affects mass, we can say that gravity does indeed affect protons and electrons, but their mass is so small that it does not have a big effect on them. Gravity doesn't affect this because gravity in not an attractive force between masses, but "a pressure force between exerted by space-time on closed volumes" that bring them closer to each other (The Higgs Boson). When we think of gravity we tend to think of it as an attractive force, that that must play a role in the attraction of protons and neutrons. Really though, it is not an attractive force in this sense and has to do more with the mass and volume of the protons and neutrons.
I guess the question that I would want to answer is the following: "Does gravity account for any attraction between the protons and neutrons in an atom?". The graviatational law accounts for only MASS and the distance between two masses, not VOLUME of a mass. What are the sizes of electrons and protons? Can you say, unequivocally that there is a negligible attractive force due to gravity? Is there any consideration of attractive forces due to charge differences?
DeleteThe equation [E=mc2] is still a little confusing
ReplyDeleteE=mc2 is an equation for physic that related matter and energy. The E in the equation stands for energy, the m stands for mass, and the c stands for constant value, which is the speed of light. Albert Einstein came up with this when he realized that matter and energy are related to the same thing. In this equation mass is a property of energy and energy is a property of mass. The mass of the object affects the time that it takes for it to go to a certain speed. If I throw a baseball, the closer it approaches the speed of light. C is the only constant in the equation because the energy or matter may change but the speed of light does not. According to this equation, mass is not the same as matter. From my understanding, energy can be converted into mass. As the difference between the two grows less, the faster you go. This is why you can not go faster than the speed of light because we would end up with infinite mass. This obviously is not possible.
You would also need infinite energy to do this, which again is not possible. This equation is essentially the correlation between matter and energy.
http://curiosity.discovery.com/question/e-mc2-letters
http://answers.askkids.com/How_Stuff_Works/Can_You_Explain_E_Mc2
I was following your logic until you started discussing the baseball throw: "If I throw a baseball, the closer it approaches the speed of light. C is the only constant in the equation because the energy or matter may change but the speed of light does not." If you continue your argument of the baseball representing mass and/or matter, how is mass/matter and energy related?
DeleteEntropy is a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system’s thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, and often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system. So what this means in a more simplified definition is that it is the disorder or randomness within a certain system. Since this relates to thermodynamics which, deals with relations between heat and other forms of energy, and overall the relations between all forms of energy. This can easily be related back to the Earth in general.
ReplyDeleteIts current day relevance is very important to our lives. We go every day based on energy and that is how we run our daily lives. It has been in theory that we will one day run out of natural resources to fuel our growing economy. This can be taken in multiple ways, whether it is from looking at entropy through food sources, natural gases, or fossil fuels. However, with the Earth increasing population all over the globe, the more that we populate the less area that we have for arable land to grow crops for people to eat. The same is for the use of fossil fuels and the growing transportation usage across the Globe.
At first, I was still confused as to what thermodynamics exactly was, and I found that thermodynamics the area of science that specifies the relationship between heat and other diverse supplies of energy. These laws are broken down into four laws that all have different aspects of heat. First, the zeroth law shows that if two systems are in thermal equilibrium with a third, they are considered to be in thermal equilibrium. Second, the first law states that the total energy of a system remains constant even if it is converted from one to another. Third, the second law shows that heat cannot flow to a system of high temperature from a lower temperature by it’s own choice. For this to happen, work must appear. The third law states the change in entropy of a system when it converts from one form to the next gets close to zero as the temperature almost reaches zero on the Kelvin scale. Out of these four laws, I believe that the second law of thermodynamics represents the work of a microwave the best. The food of colder temperature cannot go from a cold to warm state without the work of the microwave. Without this work of electricity, a microwave would not be possible to heat up food.
ReplyDeleteSource:
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-thermodynamics.htm