11

I really don't think it should be.

$dU = dQ + dW$ is the statement of the first law of Thermodynamics.

$dW$ can be put as $-pdV$ and $dQ $can be put as $TdS$ only if the process is reversible. (From the definition of entropy, the $dQ$ in $dS$ = $\frac{dQ}{T}$ is for reversible paths between the inital and final states.)

But when I checked on the net, it says $dU= TdS- pdV$ is always true for any type of process. How? Many say because it contains state variables?

We assumed the process to be reversible while deriving it, otherwise the most general equation should be $dU ≤ TdS - pdV$, right?

Where ever I see on the net, they used that equation $dU = TdS - PdV$ as something always valid and as a base to derive fancy new equations with partial differentials and stuff.

For example, in page 2 in this pdf: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/chemistry/5-60-thermodynamics-kinetics-spring-2008/lecture-notes/5_60_lecture11.pdf

Rick
  • 387
  • 1
  • 5
  • 18

3 Answers3

11

The differential statement of the first law, $$\mathrm{d}U = T\mathrm{d}S - p\mathrm{d}V,$$ is valid for all states---but not all processes---for the reasons you have described. When we apply it, we are always assuming that a reversible process connects the two states of interest; irreversible processes are outside the range of applicability of this equation. States and processes get muddled up a lot, because we can always find a reversible process that connects any two states.

The generalization of this equation for all processes is given by $$\mathrm{d}U = \delta q + \delta w,$$ which is just the statement of energy conservation. We cannot, however, write $$\mathrm{d}U \leq T\mathrm{d}S - p\mathrm{d}V,$$ for this would imply that $T$ and $p$ are defined for a system at all points during an irreversible process, which is not true.

a-cyclohexane-molecule
  • 5,481
  • 4
  • 30
  • 49
  • 1
    So the answer is no, that dU=TdS−pdV equation is only valid for reversible processes, not irreversible ones, right? I don't get why all these links say it's valid for all processes.. -- https://www.google.com/search?&dcr=0&source=hp&ei=PkUcWu_9BMfTwQKF4KCgCA&q=dU%3DTdS%E2%88%92pdV&btnK=Google+Search – Rick Nov 27 '17 at 17:04
  • @Rick, yes, that's correct: the differential statement of the first law is only valid for reversible processes. I presume the reason for the confusion is because states and processes are frequently (incorrectly) conflated. – a-cyclohexane-molecule Nov 27 '17 at 17:12
  • Have a look at the second page here: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/chemistry/5-60-thermodynamics-kinetics-spring-2008/lecture-notes/5_60_lecture11.pdf – Rick Nov 27 '17 at 17:13
  • @Rick, yes? That page states that the first law is always correct and valid for (states of) a closed system, regardless of the nature of the process, and that agrees with what my answer has stated. – a-cyclohexane-molecule Nov 27 '17 at 17:16
  • Ohhh.....so it's always valid as long as we know we can connect the 2 states with a reversible path. Kinda like how we can always write dU as nCvdT even if our process is not isochoric. Did I understand that right? – Rick Nov 27 '17 at 17:23
  • @Rick, yes, that's correct. But $\mathrm{d}U = nC_v\mathrm{d}T$ (without any pressure dependence) only for an isothermal process or an ideal gas (or some other system where the energy is independent of pressure). – a-cyclohexane-molecule Nov 27 '17 at 17:25
  • Actually, I was trying to answer this question https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/370926/du-dq-and-du-tds-but-dq-not-always-equal-to-tds-why But I got really confused, can you answer what's going on in that question please? – Rick Nov 27 '17 at 17:31
  • @Rick, this is better suited as a new question, instead of as a comment on my answer to this question. But you seem to have answered it fine. – a-cyclohexane-molecule Nov 27 '17 at 17:35
  • I don't know, I guess it'll be marked as a duplicate if I ask it again.. What I'm asking is: We just discussed that equation dU=TdS−pdV is always valid. If we have an irreversible isochoric process, dV should be 0, so dU= TdS. -----(1) also, dU = q + w always, here w is zero, so dU = q ----------(2) If you combine (1) and (2), we should get q = TdS, This is what's confusing, it clearly isn't, right? Since it's an irreversible process. – Rick Nov 27 '17 at 18:13
  • @Rick, this will be my last reply to your comments. I think that my answer is complete and will resolve any difficulties you encounter if you read it closely. I have stated that $\mathrm{d}U = T\mathrm{d}S-p\mathrm{d}V$ is valid for all states (but only reversible processes), and you are trying to apply it to an irreversible process. The premise is wrong, so your conclusions are wrong. – a-cyclohexane-molecule Nov 27 '17 at 18:18
  • 1
    Ohhhh....ok. I understood. I was in a really confused state, just calmed down and re-read your answer carefully. I understood now. Thanks alot. I just realized how stupid my many follow up questions look now :P Sorry for bothering you with all that. Thanks alot!! – Rick Nov 27 '17 at 18:36
  • Does the conditions used to derive the equations apply too? Like in this case we use a constant Pressure reversible process to derive the equation dU=TdS-pdV. Do we have to find a constant pressure reversible process between two states to be able to use the equation dU=TdS-pdV? – knoftrix May 25 '20 at 15:36
  • Sorry, but I don't see where you rely on a constant-pressure reversible process to derive the first law. – a-cyclohexane-molecule May 26 '20 at 16:18
  • In an isothermal process why do we need an expression? dT is going to be zero anyways and dU will also be zero since dT is zero.

    replying to this: "But dU=nCvdT (without any pressure dependence) only for an isothermal process or an ideal gas (or some other system where the energy is independent of pressure)."

    – optimus prime Jan 04 '21 at 07:01
  • @optimusprime I suspect I meant to say isobaric. Even in an isothermal process, there may be changes in the energy due to changes in pressure.

    Edit: Actually, it may be isovolumetric, since U can't be a function of purely intensive variables...

    – a-cyclohexane-molecule Jan 04 '21 at 15:58
  • @a-cyclohexane-molecule I understand that $dU=TdS-pdV$ can be then only applied to calculate an internal energy difference between 2 equilibrium state. What about the relation for irreversible processes $dU=\delta Q_\mathrm{irr}+\delta W_\mathrm{irr}=T(dS-d_i S)-p_\mathrm{ex}dV$ (where $d_i S$ is the entropy production)? – Guiste Mar 22 '21 at 14:09
  • @Guiste I'm not familiar enough with that equation to discuss it at length, sorry. If you want to calculate the change in energy for an irreversible process, you can still use dU = TdS - pdV. If you want to calculate the entropy production for an irreversible process, you would probably use the framework of stochastic thermodynamics and compute path probabilities. – a-cyclohexane-molecule Mar 22 '21 at 14:41
  • As I understood your answer, you can only use $dU=TdS-pdV$ if initial and final state are in equilibrium. Otherwise I think it makes no sense, because the basics of this equation is that it is enough to know 2 thermodynamic variables to express the change of another one ($U$), and such a relation between thermodynamic variables only holds in the equilibrium state. – Guiste Mar 23 '21 at 01:59
  • For the equation I mentioned above, we know that $\delta Q_\mathrm{irr}<TdS$ and $\delta W_\mathrm{irr}=-p_\mathrm{ex}dV$, do you agree with that? We can then write $\delta Q_\mathrm{irr}=TdS-Td_i S$ to indicate the irreversible entropy production. As I understand it this equation should be applicable to calculate the internal energy change for an irreversible process, independent if the final state is in equilibrium or not. – Guiste Mar 23 '21 at 02:01
  • @Guiste You're correct to state that dU = TdS - pdV implies that both the initial and final states are at equilibrium and that it would not work for a system with an initial/final state out of equilibrium. In your scenario, the final state may not be at equilibrium. In that case, I'm not sure $U_\text{final}$ makes any sense, because it's quite possible that the energy is not well-defined for such a non-equilibrium state. I don't feel qualified to speak about your irreversible process equation, because there may be subtleties that I'm not aware of. – a-cyclohexane-molecule Mar 23 '21 at 19:24
3

For any two processes (reversible or irreversible) connecting two equilibrium states that are described by the state variables $U,T,S,V,p$ it is always true that $$dU=TdS-pdV.$$ If during the processes the transferred heat and work performed are $\delta Q$ and $\delta W$ then it is always true that $$dU=\delta Q + \delta W.$$

Both equations are just the 1st law of thermodynamics applied to any processes connecting two equilibrium states described by the given thermodynamic variables. The 2nd law comes into play by postulating an equality $TdS = \delta Q_{rev}$ for any reversible processes and an inequality $TdS > \delta Q_{irrev}$ for any irreversible process. Note that this does not say anything about quasi-static processes. The only requirement is that the beginning and end of the processes have well defined thermodynamic parameters and during the process one should be able tell the amount of work and heat transferred.

Since for all processes $dU=TdS-pdV = \delta Q + \delta W$ and $$TdS \ge \delta Q$$ we also have the inequality $$pdV \ge \delta W $$ between any two equilibrium states.

If now we demand that during any instant of the process between the end equilibrium states we are able to define the thermodynamic variables $U,T,S,p,V$ then during the whole process we will have these (in)equalities.

Occasionally, you do see the inequality $dU < TdS-pdV$ but in this form $p$ is not the state variable we call system pressure, it is instead the external pressure needed to overcome both the system and some friction or similar cause to affect the compression $dV$.

hyportnex
  • 484
  • 4
  • 8
0

$dU = TdS-pdV$ is not always valid. Furthermore, the reason it's not generally valid isn't because of the distinction between reversible and irreversible processes. There's an easy workaround for that*. Rather, it's because it only applies to closed systems. If the system is open, it is necessary to use the more general expression $dU = TdS-pdV+\sum_i \mu_i dn_i$.

*Here's the workaround for irreversible processes: $dU = TdS-pdV+\sum_i \mu_i dn_i$ can be used to calculate $dU$ for any process, reversible or irreversible, since if there is an irreversible path that connects two states, it is always possible to find a reversible path that connects them.

Likewise, $dU = \text{đ}q + \text{đ}w$ is not always valid for the same reason $dU = TdS-pdV$ isn't: it only applies to closed systems.

The following will illustrate why the idea that we must use $\text{đ}q \text{ and } \text{đ}w$ for irreversible processes is an artificial one: To calculate $\Delta U$ for one of the most common types of irreversible processes we study, namely chemical reactions in open systems, we typically don't use an expression for $dU$ that contains $\text{đ}q \text{ and } \text{đ}w$. Instead, we rely on $dU = TdS-pdV+\sum_i \mu_i dn_i$. That's because $dU = \text{đ}q + \text{đ}w$ can't be straightforwardly extended to reacting open systems. I.e., the following equation is not valid, period:

$dU = \text{đ}q + \text{đ}w + \sum_i \mu_i dn_i$

For more on this, see:

Jan T. Knuiman, Peter A. Barneveld, and Nicolaas A. M. Besseling. On the Relation between the Fundamental Equation of Thermodynamics and the Energy Balance Equation in the Context of Closed and Open Systems. Journal of Chemical Education 2012 89 (8), 968-972. DOI: 10.1021/ed200405k

theorist
  • 12,135
  • 1
  • 35
  • 53