dor_id: 4115726

506.#.#.a: Público

590.#.#.d: Cada artículo es evaluado mediante una revisión ciega única. Los revisores son externos nacionales e internacionales.

510.0.#.a: Arts and Humanities Citation Index, Revistes Cientifiques de Ciencies Socials Humanitais (CARHUS Plus), Latinoamericanas en Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades (CLASE), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH PLUS), Sistema Regional de Información en Línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y Portugal (Latindex), SCOPUS, Journal Storage (JSTOR), The Philosopher’s Index, Ulrich’s Periodical Directory

561.#.#.u: http://www.filosoficas.unam.mx/

650.#.4.x: Artes y Humanidades

336.#.#.b: article

336.#.#.3: Artículo de Investigación

336.#.#.a: Artículo

351.#.#.6: http://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica

351.#.#.b: Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía

351.#.#.a: Artículos

harvesting_group: RevistasUNAM

270.1.#.p: Revistas UNAM. Dirección General de Publicaciones y Fomento Editorial, UNAM en revistas@unam.mx

590.#.#.c: Open Journal Systems (OJS)

270.#.#.d: MX

270.1.#.d: México

590.#.#.b: Concentrador

883.#.#.u: http://www.revistas.unam.mx/front/

883.#.#.a: Revistas UNAM

590.#.#.a: Coordinación de Difusión Cultural, UNAM

883.#.#.1: https://www.publicaciones.unam.mx/

883.#.#.q: Dirección General de Publicaciones y Fomento Editorial, UNAM

850.#.#.a: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

856.4.0.u: http://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica/article/view/647/624

100.1.#.a: Garrido Garrido, Julián

524.#.#.a: Garrido Garrido, Julián (1987). Formulaciones del segundo principio de la termodinámica. Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía; Vol 19 No 56, 1987; 77-110. Recuperado de https://repositorio.unam.mx/contenidos/4115726

245.1.0.a: Formulaciones del segundo principio de la termodinámica

502.#.#.c: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

561.1.#.a: Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas, UNAM

264.#.0.c: 1987

264.#.1.c: 2018-12-10

506.1.#.a: La titularidad de los derechos patrimoniales de esta obra pertenece a las instituciones editoras. Su uso se rige por una licencia Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 Internacional, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode.es, fecha de asignación de la licencia 2018-12-10, para un uso diferente consultar al responsable jurídico del repositorio por medio del correo electrónico alberto@filosoficas.unam.mx

884.#.#.k: http://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica/article/view/647

001.#.#.#: critica:oai:ojs2.132.248.184.97:article/647

041.#.7.h: spa

520.3.#.a: The second principle is usually considered as an axiom of Classical Equilibrium Thermodynamics (CET), but there are different versions of that law and the deductive relations between them are not immediately evident. That is so because the formulations were given in distinct epochs using very heterogeneous concepts, from the “mechanist" language before the stable construction of CET until the properly theoretical language of systems and states. The versions of Kelvin-Planck (KP), Clausius (C1) and Carnot (Ca) preceded the concept of entropy. That emerged tied to the formulation of the second principle given by classical entropy (SC): ΔS ≥ Σ1 ∫ dQ1/T1 (where the 1s are the systems that interchange heat with the system that varies its entropy, its heat surroundings). The law of increasing entropy (AS), that of potential entropy (PS) and the statemet of Carathéodory (Cth) are postentropic formulations of the second principle. From another point of view, the expressions KP, C1, Ca, SC and Cth can be classified as belonging to the classical developments of the theory, and the law PS as a member of the Gibbsian representations. Formulation AS could be considered as above this second clasification, since from this study it follows that it constitutes the most powerful version of the second principle, which permits the deduction equally of the Gibbsian expression (PS) as the classical ones (first SC, and on that basis the remaining four, which are more specific). The deductive tree of such diverse laws can only be realized after a systematic analysis of the basic concepts of CET, which permits a homogeneous reformulation of them all. For that task the genetic, historical and intuitive point of view should be left aside so as to adopt a purely axiomatic-deductive point of view. The results of my formulation of CET, Garrido (1983-1986), realized following the axiomatic focus designed by Bunge (1967) for factual theories, have been used in this previous conceptual analysis. On the other hand, the deductive tree of the formuIations of the second principle constructed here has as effect a modification, small but interesting, of the axiomatic base for my proposal for CET: in my previous work I considered the laws SC and AS strictly equivalent and as such interchangeable as axioms, and I had chosen precisely SC for that purpose. Now, as l argue here in detail, I have confirmed that AS is more general than SC and so should be the formulation of the second principle that appears as an axiom of the theory. Amongst the basic concepts of the domain of reference of the laws of this theory which are used here, the strangest is that of pseudoequilibrium (the state of those systems which are not in equilibrium, but whose subsystems are). In the usual statements of the theory this concept at times appears explicitly and with varying denominations (system with internal constraints, internally constrained system, etc.), and on many occasions appears in an implicit way, with no proper name (the term equilibrium is frequently used in a wide sense, covering pseudoequilibrium, but that ambiguity is a source of confusion and obscurity). Here a general and exact definition of this concept is presented and, aboye all, is systematically used, greatly easing the theoretical and homogeneous formulation of versions of the second principle, in particular that of the law of increasing entropy: (AS) For any isolated system, between two instants in which it is in a state of equilibrium or pseudoequilibrium: ΔS ≥ 0, yielding identity when in all the intermediate instants the system maintains itself in equilibrium or pseudoequilibrium. Even if this law is the most powerful expression of the second principle, it is not sufficient for the deduction of the remaining versions. It is also necessary to consider other axioma of CET, such as the first principle, the law of heat, and the postulate of isolation and equilibrium. Nevertheless, even if they are not exclusively theorems of AS, they can still be considered as (weak) formulations of the second principle, That is due to the fact that what is most peculiar about them, inequality, is deductively inherited from AS (the only axiom of the theory that contains it). The second principle is usually considered as an axiom of Classical Equilibrium Thermodynamics (CET), but there are different versions of that law and the deductive relations between them are not immediately evident. That is so because the formulations were given in distinct epochs using very heterogeneous concepts, from the “mechanist" language before the stable construction of CET until the properly theoretical language of systems and states. The versions of Kelvin-Planck (KP), Clausius (C1) and Carnot (Ca) preceded the concept of entropy. That emerged tied to the formulation of the second principle given by classical entropy (SC): ΔS ≥ Σ1 ∫ dQ1/T1 (where the 1s are the systems that interchange heat with the system that varies its entropy, its heat surroundings). The law of increasing entropy (AS), that of potential entropy (PS) and the statemet of Carathéodory (Cth) are postentropic formulations of the second principle. From another point of view, the expressions KP, C1, Ca, SC and Cth can be classified as belonging to the classical developments of the theory, and the law PS as a member of the Gibbsian representations. Formulation AS could be considered as above this second clasification, since from this study it follows that it constitutes the most powerful version of the second principle, which permits the deduction equally of the Gibbsian expression (PS) as the classical ones (first SC, and on that basis the remaining four, which are more specific). The deductive tree of such diverse laws can only be realized after a systematic analysis of the basic concepts of CET, which permits a homogeneous reformulation of them all. For that task the genetic, historical and intuitive point of view should be left aside so as to adopt a purely axiomatic-deductive point of view. The results of my formulation of CET, Garrido (1983-1986), realized following the axiomatic focus designed by Bunge (1967) for factual theories, have been used in this previous conceptual analysis. On the other hand, the deductive tree of the formuIations of the second principle constructed here has as effect a modification, small but interesting, of the axiomatic base for my proposal for CET: in my previous work I considered the laws SC and AS strictly equivalent and as such interchangeable as axioms, and I had chosen precisely SC for that purpose. Now, as l argue here in detail, I have confirmed that AS is more general than SC and so should be the formulation of the second principle that appears as an axiom of the theory. Amongst the basic concepts of the domain of reference of the laws of this theory which are used here, the strangest is that of pseudoequilibrium (the state of those systems which are not in equilibrium, but whose subsystems are). In the usual statements of the theory this concept at times appears explicitly and with varying denominations (system with internal constraints, internally constrained system, etc.), and on many occasions appears in an implicit way, with no proper name (the term equilibrium is frequently used in a wide sense, covering pseudoequilibrium, but that ambiguity is a source of confusion and obscurity). Here a general and exact definition of this concept is presented and, aboye all, is systematically used, greatly easing the theoretical and homogeneous formulation of versions of the second principle, in particular that of the law of increasing entropy: (AS) For any isolated system, between two instants in which it is in a state of equilibrium or pseudoequilibrium: ΔS ≥ 0, yielding identity when in all the intermediate instants the system maintains itself in equilibrium or pseudoequilibrium. Even if this law is the most powerful expression of the second principle, it is not sufficient for the deduction of the remaining versions. It is also necessary to consider other axioma of CET, such as the first principle, the law of heat, and the postulate of isolation and equilibrium. Nevertheless, even if they are not exclusively theorems of AS, they can still be considered as (weak) formulations of the second principle, That is due to the fact that what is most peculiar about them, inequality, is deductively inherited from AS (the only axiom of the theory that contains it).

773.1.#.t: Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía; Vol 19 No 56 (1987); 77-110

773.1.#.o: http://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica

046.#.#.j: 2021-09-28 00:00:00.000000

022.#.#.a: ISSN electrónico: 1870-4905; ISSN impreso: 0011-1503

310.#.#.a: Cuatrimestral

300.#.#.a: Páginas: 77-110

264.#.1.b: Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas, UNAM

758.#.#.1: http://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica

doi: https://doi.org/10.22201/iifs.18704905e.1987.647

handle: 008f05cf87c26816

856.#.0.q: application/pdf

file_creation_date: 2010-10-11 18:27:08.0

file_modification_date: 2010-10-28 16:23:24.0

file_creator: Claudia Chavez

file_name: 21ca5b0b13e10b53e70836cb341b2f1db96f1d91e705fcd1d24d848c9172b8fb.pdf

file_pages_number: 34

file_format_version: application/pdf; version=1.5

file_size: 373059

245.1.0.b: Formulaciones del segundo principio de la termodinámica

last_modified: 2021-11-09 23:50:00

license_url: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode.es

license_type: by-nc-nd

No entro en nada

No entro en nada 2

Artículo

Formulaciones del segundo principio de la termodinámica

Garrido Garrido, Julián

Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas, UNAM, publicado en Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía, y cosechado de Revistas UNAM

Licencia de uso

Procedencia del contenido

Cita

Garrido Garrido, Julián (1987). Formulaciones del segundo principio de la termodinámica. Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía; Vol 19 No 56, 1987; 77-110. Recuperado de https://repositorio.unam.mx/contenidos/4115726

Descripción del recurso

Autor(es)
Garrido Garrido, Julián
Tipo
Artículo de Investigación
Área del conocimiento
Artes y Humanidades
Título
Formulaciones del segundo principio de la termodinámica
Fecha
2018-12-10
Resumen
The second principle is usually considered as an axiom of Classical Equilibrium Thermodynamics (CET), but there are different versions of that law and the deductive relations between them are not immediately evident. That is so because the formulations were given in distinct epochs using very heterogeneous concepts, from the “mechanist" language before the stable construction of CET until the properly theoretical language of systems and states. The versions of Kelvin-Planck (KP), Clausius (C1) and Carnot (Ca) preceded the concept of entropy. That emerged tied to the formulation of the second principle given by classical entropy (SC): ΔS ≥ Σ1 ∫ dQ1/T1 (where the 1s are the systems that interchange heat with the system that varies its entropy, its heat surroundings). The law of increasing entropy (AS), that of potential entropy (PS) and the statemet of Carathéodory (Cth) are postentropic formulations of the second principle. From another point of view, the expressions KP, C1, Ca, SC and Cth can be classified as belonging to the classical developments of the theory, and the law PS as a member of the Gibbsian representations. Formulation AS could be considered as above this second clasification, since from this study it follows that it constitutes the most powerful version of the second principle, which permits the deduction equally of the Gibbsian expression (PS) as the classical ones (first SC, and on that basis the remaining four, which are more specific). The deductive tree of such diverse laws can only be realized after a systematic analysis of the basic concepts of CET, which permits a homogeneous reformulation of them all. For that task the genetic, historical and intuitive point of view should be left aside so as to adopt a purely axiomatic-deductive point of view. The results of my formulation of CET, Garrido (1983-1986), realized following the axiomatic focus designed by Bunge (1967) for factual theories, have been used in this previous conceptual analysis. On the other hand, the deductive tree of the formuIations of the second principle constructed here has as effect a modification, small but interesting, of the axiomatic base for my proposal for CET: in my previous work I considered the laws SC and AS strictly equivalent and as such interchangeable as axioms, and I had chosen precisely SC for that purpose. Now, as l argue here in detail, I have confirmed that AS is more general than SC and so should be the formulation of the second principle that appears as an axiom of the theory. Amongst the basic concepts of the domain of reference of the laws of this theory which are used here, the strangest is that of pseudoequilibrium (the state of those systems which are not in equilibrium, but whose subsystems are). In the usual statements of the theory this concept at times appears explicitly and with varying denominations (system with internal constraints, internally constrained system, etc.), and on many occasions appears in an implicit way, with no proper name (the term equilibrium is frequently used in a wide sense, covering pseudoequilibrium, but that ambiguity is a source of confusion and obscurity). Here a general and exact definition of this concept is presented and, aboye all, is systematically used, greatly easing the theoretical and homogeneous formulation of versions of the second principle, in particular that of the law of increasing entropy: (AS) For any isolated system, between two instants in which it is in a state of equilibrium or pseudoequilibrium: ΔS ≥ 0, yielding identity when in all the intermediate instants the system maintains itself in equilibrium or pseudoequilibrium. Even if this law is the most powerful expression of the second principle, it is not sufficient for the deduction of the remaining versions. It is also necessary to consider other axioma of CET, such as the first principle, the law of heat, and the postulate of isolation and equilibrium. Nevertheless, even if they are not exclusively theorems of AS, they can still be considered as (weak) formulations of the second principle, That is due to the fact that what is most peculiar about them, inequality, is deductively inherited from AS (the only axiom of the theory that contains it). The second principle is usually considered as an axiom of Classical Equilibrium Thermodynamics (CET), but there are different versions of that law and the deductive relations between them are not immediately evident. That is so because the formulations were given in distinct epochs using very heterogeneous concepts, from the “mechanist" language before the stable construction of CET until the properly theoretical language of systems and states. The versions of Kelvin-Planck (KP), Clausius (C1) and Carnot (Ca) preceded the concept of entropy. That emerged tied to the formulation of the second principle given by classical entropy (SC): ΔS ≥ Σ1 ∫ dQ1/T1 (where the 1s are the systems that interchange heat with the system that varies its entropy, its heat surroundings). The law of increasing entropy (AS), that of potential entropy (PS) and the statemet of Carathéodory (Cth) are postentropic formulations of the second principle. From another point of view, the expressions KP, C1, Ca, SC and Cth can be classified as belonging to the classical developments of the theory, and the law PS as a member of the Gibbsian representations. Formulation AS could be considered as above this second clasification, since from this study it follows that it constitutes the most powerful version of the second principle, which permits the deduction equally of the Gibbsian expression (PS) as the classical ones (first SC, and on that basis the remaining four, which are more specific). The deductive tree of such diverse laws can only be realized after a systematic analysis of the basic concepts of CET, which permits a homogeneous reformulation of them all. For that task the genetic, historical and intuitive point of view should be left aside so as to adopt a purely axiomatic-deductive point of view. The results of my formulation of CET, Garrido (1983-1986), realized following the axiomatic focus designed by Bunge (1967) for factual theories, have been used in this previous conceptual analysis. On the other hand, the deductive tree of the formuIations of the second principle constructed here has as effect a modification, small but interesting, of the axiomatic base for my proposal for CET: in my previous work I considered the laws SC and AS strictly equivalent and as such interchangeable as axioms, and I had chosen precisely SC for that purpose. Now, as l argue here in detail, I have confirmed that AS is more general than SC and so should be the formulation of the second principle that appears as an axiom of the theory. Amongst the basic concepts of the domain of reference of the laws of this theory which are used here, the strangest is that of pseudoequilibrium (the state of those systems which are not in equilibrium, but whose subsystems are). In the usual statements of the theory this concept at times appears explicitly and with varying denominations (system with internal constraints, internally constrained system, etc.), and on many occasions appears in an implicit way, with no proper name (the term equilibrium is frequently used in a wide sense, covering pseudoequilibrium, but that ambiguity is a source of confusion and obscurity). Here a general and exact definition of this concept is presented and, aboye all, is systematically used, greatly easing the theoretical and homogeneous formulation of versions of the second principle, in particular that of the law of increasing entropy: (AS) For any isolated system, between two instants in which it is in a state of equilibrium or pseudoequilibrium: ΔS ≥ 0, yielding identity when in all the intermediate instants the system maintains itself in equilibrium or pseudoequilibrium. Even if this law is the most powerful expression of the second principle, it is not sufficient for the deduction of the remaining versions. It is also necessary to consider other axioma of CET, such as the first principle, the law of heat, and the postulate of isolation and equilibrium. Nevertheless, even if they are not exclusively theorems of AS, they can still be considered as (weak) formulations of the second principle, That is due to the fact that what is most peculiar about them, inequality, is deductively inherited from AS (the only axiom of the theory that contains it).
Idioma
spa
ISSN
ISSN electrónico: 1870-4905; ISSN impreso: 0011-1503

Enlaces