Talk:Thermodynamic potentials

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
WikiProject Physics
Portal:Physics
 Physics Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ]
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics.

Please rate this article, and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Regarding the merging of of the thermodynamic potentials section from the thermodynamics page - I think a paragraph or two for someone wanting to get an overview is appropriate, then they can link to this main article for a more in-depth explanation. PAR 22:15, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Recent edit

I removed the section that was added, because I think it was just pulled from the thermodynamics article, and it doesn't fit.

  • There are no "above differential forms"
  • the notation using E has never been introduced
  • thermodynamics stands more or less alone as a discipline, It does not need statistical mechanics to justify it or to derive any of its results, only to explain its results from a microscopic viewpoint.
  • It is important not to get statistical mechanics and thermodynamics all jumbled up. Any discussion of this fact should go on the thermodynamics page. PAR 12:45, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Second Law error?

I think the statements this article makes about the second law might be wrong because there is no mention that the temperature in the first statement is the temperature of the surroundings and not the system. Flying Jazz 04:40, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Style of Introduction

The introduction is good (especially when compared with other articles around this topic) but is weakened by the words "in a sense,". For this sort of article we need positive statements. If the author has reservations about this assertion we should at least be told what the other "senses" are.

I move we remove the words "in a sense,". It still stands as a correct and meaniningful statement.

Overall the style is clear and is way ahead of the "entropy" articles which are long on jargon and short on clear defintions. PAS 22:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/h/e/Talk%7EThermodynamic_potentials_91e8.html"