star-crossed melodies

well, i found the answer…
it’s about the clausius and kelvin-planck statements that i mentioned in my previous post before. well, the day after that i found the anwer (why of course, the assignment was supposed to be collected then).

anyway, it goes like this (you might find the following as inunderstandable. you may stop at any time you want)…
first…we must create a system in which it violates the statement of kelvin-planck, which is, in this case would be a system that generates pure work from input of an amount of heat. so we give heat as an input from a hot body…and the system converted all of the heat (a hundred percent efficiency) into work.

and then, the work from the first system should be channeled into the second system. well, in here, let’s say that the second system is a form of refrigeration system, in which, it transfer an amount of heat from a cold body into hot body by means of work from the previous system, the first one. now, this system doesn’t violate any statement since it is, by far, a normal system running a thermodynamic cycle.

but…if we change our perspective and create a new system consisting of both systems plus the bodies, we shall find…a system similar to that in clausius’ statement. a system with only heat transfers in it. in there, we will only find the heat transferred into the first system (to be changed later into work) plus heat coming from the cold body that is transferred to the hot body via the second system.

if we go through calculations of the amount of heats going in or out of the combined system, we shall find out that the heat entering the system is, in fact, the same as the amount of heat coming out of it. but one thing’s bothering is that there’s an amount of heat entering the system from the cold body and being sent to the hot body without any work involved to the system itself.

so…what do we see here? yes, a violation to the clausius’ statement! that’s why…it is proven that the violation of kelvin-planck’s statement will also violates clausius’ statement and therefore, there’s equivalence of both statements.

sigh…i couldn’t believe i missed that the whole night. LOL!!!

well, at this moment, i should be sitting on my desk working on thermodynamics homework. it’s just that…i’ve been analyzing this one problem for hours and have been trying to figure out the anwer but i came out with nothing so i ended up here in front of an online computer, writing stuff, which is, i assume, not so important at all.

first of all, i am so depressed. how can it be so hard just to find an example (or was it an evidence) of equivalence that the violation of kelvin-planck’s statement will eventually bring another violation to clausius’ statement?

it’s simple, but it seemed that my brain has already been twisted by all the things happened today (aka, i was tired). i have already an example of equivalence that violation of clausius’ statement will also violate kelvin-planck’s statement. yet, i couldn’t find a way to prove otherwise! gee, i’ve tried several models but it didn’t match!

ugh, i want to go to sleep…

do you guys familiar with sun tzu’s saying:

in times of peace, get ready for war
in times of war, prepare to make peace

more or less it was like that. well, several days ago me and my friend had a talk. basically it was about a friend of mine who broke up with his girlfriend and the girl didn’t want them to break up. she was quite stubborn to keep the relationship while my friend felt that he couldn’t take it anymore. anyways…

i suddenly came up with the thought:

in times of being single, prepare for a relationship
in times of having relationship, get ready for breaking up

now…what made me came up with those thoughts? i don’t know…walking around with no certain destination? it happens, a lot…those thoughts just popped up out of nowhere.

nah, i’ll save the thoughts for myself then. who knows it’ll become useful someday. who knows…*shrugs*