Re: [Phys-l] thermodynamics without entropy ?!??

[chuck britton <cvbritton@earthlink.net>]

I'd gladly give up 'entropy' as soon as I see how to do the same  
stuff differently.

Introductory Thermo gets short shrift in most Intro Physics courses  
and I suspect that the evil head of entropy is a major reason to  
'skip' it.

Energy and Entropy are (IMHO) the two most important cross-discipline  
topics that there are.

How can I explain the cooling of a relaxing rubber band without a  
handwaving salute to entropy etc.



On Oct 3, 2007, at 3:44 PM, John Denker wrote:

> Has anybody recently looked at the last two chapters of
>   Arnold Arons _Teaching Introductory Physics_ (1996)?
>
> IMHO it has problems.
>
> Chapters III-3 and III-4 are a long discussion of thermodynamics ---
> mentioning heat, sensible heat, latent heat, caloric, friction, and
> energy --- without ever mentioning entropy.  Ideas such as spontaneity
> and irreversibility that are intimately connected with entropy are
> almost-explicitly attributed to energy instead.  Also the student is
> led by detailed historical arguments (*) to a wrong theory, namely
> conservation of caloric.  This will have to be unlearned later.
> Unlearning is never easy.
>
>   (*) Tangential remark: this is yet another illustration of why
>   IMHO it is a bad idea to follow the "historical approach".
>
> The discussion of friction in section 4,22 seems like wrong physics
> and bad pedagogy.  Including unobservable microscopic effects in W
> largely defeats the purpose of thermodynamics.  (I can explain in
> more detail if anybody is interested.)
>
> Is there something worthwhile I'm missing here?
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l