PDA

View Full Version : Physics Problem of the Week!

masterazn
28-01-2004, 09:22
A ship heats its boilers and propels itself without the use of coal or oil in the following way: it pumps in warm sea water, concentrates the extracted heat in its boilers; and discharges the cooled sea water (possibly as ice) back into the ocean.

Does it violate the conservation of energy act?

Will this work?
--------------------
this is a problem for school, it's not worth anything really.

So far, I've said this does not violate the conservation of energy act because the heat is taken from the water and used to heat the boilers. But I think this will not work because there won't be enough heat from the water (plus, if it worked, we would be doing that now).

What are you ideas? Am I correct?

Corneo
28-01-2004, 09:46
Then again since when did warm sea water existed?

Anakha1
28-01-2004, 09:53
Then again since when did warm sea water existed?

You've never been to the carribean, I take it.

asdf
28-01-2004, 09:56
it violates the second law of thermodynamics, but not the laws of energy conservation...

edit: i believe it's actually the second... too lazy to open a textbook

masterazn
28-01-2004, 09:58
asdf, could you explain?

asdf
28-01-2004, 10:09
well, in a nutshell, the energy is conserved so that rule isn't broken

well, it's more like an extention of the second law, which is essentially that total entropy will increase, and won't decrease without a certain amount of energy put into the system.

the upshot of all that is, you have to do work (generating heat in the process since there is no known 100% efficient heat exchange machine known to man) to get some extra heat out of the system.

masterazn
28-01-2004, 10:16
i don't understand....could you explain it from some kind of beggining?

Rewen
28-01-2004, 10:38
Hmm by what method would the "heat" by "extracted" and through what type of mechanism? Or is this purely hypothetical?

Note: Physics nube. :xeek:

zarikdon
28-01-2004, 10:48
i don't understand....could you explain it from some kind of beggining?

To understand the question, you probably have to know a little thermodynamics, which was what asdf was getting at with the 2nd law of thermo. Thermodynamics should probably be more properly called "statistical mechanics," but all that means is that it concerns itself with the mechanics (motion, energy, stuff like that) of a "statistically large" number of particles. Like what happens to the individual water molecules when you boil a pot of water. Statistically large here just means that it's much much larger than 1.

To recap quickly, there are 3 laws of thermodynamics.

1) Energy conservation.

2) If you have an engine that takes an energy input, it can't convert ALL of that energy into useful work. Essentially, it means that there is no 100% efficient engine. An alternative way to state this is that the entropy of a system will always increase unless you actively pump energy into it. Entropy can be roughly thought of as the amount of disorder in whatever you're looking at.

3) At zero temperature, all materials have the universal property that their entropy is zero.

These three laws are all independent of each other... and your question really only revolves around the first two. Or really, only the second one, so let's ignore the third one for now. You're right that energy is conserved, so the boat's engine doesn't violate the first law. However, it does violate the second law. The problem occurs when you say that the engine "condenses the heat" from the water. Extracting the heat from the water is actually decreasing the disorder (entropy) of the water, and requires you to put IN energy. In fact, you need to put in more energy into your engine than the amount of energy you're getting out. That's the basic idea of the 2nd law.

Avalon
28-01-2004, 10:52
Hey, the bike's the most effiicient input-to-output ration machine we've got right?
Somewhere in the area of 60%?

Master, is that exactly how the problem is stated?
I'dve thought the coal/oil boilers heat water in to steam, which in turn drives sets of stem turbines, which then turn the drive shaft or propellers. This water, can I'd assume come from the outside environ...and be returned once it cools back in to liquid form...

Underseer
28-01-2004, 11:32
I have a background in physics, but it seems the practical answer is more appropriate here.

With current technology, there is no way to contruct a heat engine as you suggest. If you wanted to suck in sea water, suck the heat out of it then dump the resulting ice and/or cold sea water overboard, you would lose energy, not make it. In all likelihood, the way to acheive this would be through refridgeration and anyone who's ever paid an electric bill knows refridgerators lose energy, not make it.

Anakha1
28-01-2004, 11:42
He's talking about using the heat from the water to power engines that spit the same water, now cold, back out to propel the ship. Theoretically I think it would be possible, but I don't think we have the technology, nor would the water provide enough heat naturally.

But then, I know jack all about physics beyond when you enable gravity by hurling your little sister's barbie off the top story window into a wood chipper when you're nine, mom gets pretty pissy.

masterazn
28-01-2004, 12:33
well, actually, the problem is states exactly liek that. I'm assuming the teacher means the water is extracted of heat and the heat is used to heat a boiler which then drives a turbine to a propeller.

let me get this straight. so it DOES violate the conservation of energy act because you need to put in energy to get out energy of the water? I'm very confused...

tarnok
28-01-2004, 13:22
let me get this straight. so it DOES violate the conservation of energy act because you need to put in energy to get out energy of the water? I'm very confused...

No, it _doesn't_ violate conservation of energy. It is impossible as far as modern physics is concerned because it requires the total entropy of the system to decrease which is supposed to be impossible. So it checks out under conservation of energy, but fails because of another law of thermodynamics.

As an interesting side-note, I read an article a few months ago in a waiting room somewhere that claimed that scientists had found decreases in entropy in very small scale closed systems. Don't ask me what magazine it was, I can't recall.

Underseer
28-01-2004, 14:03
He's talking about using the heat from the water to power engines that spit the same water, now cold, back out to propel the ship. Theoretically I think it would be possible, but I don't think we have the technology, nor would the water provide enough heat naturally.I know what he's talking about and as I said, that's not possible. Sucking the heat energy out of the water would cost more energy than you would get.

Heat engines only work if you have a temperature difference. However with a boat on an ocean, you're not going to have a temperature difference unless you create one. Since no process is 100% energy efficient (ain't no such thing as a closed system), creating a temperature difference will cost more energy than you'll get out of it when you use the resulting temperature difference to drive some sort of heat engine.

masterazn
28-01-2004, 14:19
hrm okay, this was one weird problem....i kinda get it. but why does it require heat to extract heat!?

Underseer
28-01-2004, 14:31
Creating a temperature difference requires work. Think about it. If you can use a temperature difference to do work (wihch is what a heat engine is), then it must cost energy to create a temperature difference, right?

Think about a refridgerator. Those things are about as efficient as technology allows. They create a temperature difference by moving heat from the interior of the refridgerator to the coils in back.

masterazn
28-01-2004, 14:46
well...oh i see, but wouldn't it work if you had enough heat?

Crispyknight
28-01-2004, 15:07
No. Unless I'm sadly mistaken in my understanding of physics, (possible!) you will never have a temperature gradient like the one in the problem under passive conditions. You'd have to be pumping energy into the system to do this, and it would be more efficient to just put the energy into the boilers and go. You could get propulsion on a boiling ocean, but thats not gonna happen anythie soon.

maccool
28-01-2004, 15:13
To recap quickly, there are 3 laws of thermodynamics.

You left out the zeroth law ;)

Pier
28-01-2004, 15:20
You left out the zeroth law ;)

Yes, but it is the most trivial.

If two objects netto exchange no heat, they have the same temperature.

Grr pIER

maccool
28-01-2004, 15:24
You say most trivial, I submit that it is the most fundamental.

Six of one, half-dozen of the other.

28-01-2004, 15:34
A ship heats its boilers and propels itself without the use of coal or oil in the following way: it pumps in warm sea water, concentrates the extracted heat in its boilers; and discharges the cooled sea water (possibly as ice) back into the ocean.

Does it violate the conservation of energy act?

Will this work?
--------------------
this is a problem for school, it's not worth anything really.

So far, I've said this does not violate the conservation of energy act because the heat is taken from the water and used to heat the boilers. But I think this will not work because there won't be enough heat from the water (plus, if it worked, we would be doing that now).

What are you ideas? Am I correct?

Answer to you first question...no. It does not violate the conservation laws. Energy is neither being created nor destroyed here.

Will it work. Theoretcially, yes. If you allow sea water, by means of velocity and natural pressure difference (no pumps) to pump itself thru an infinite (or however many it takes) rows of coils, and say these coils are wrapped around something colder than the seawater itself, say a cold rod or something. Use the cold rod to transfer energy to something at the other end, something that can transfer heat (in small amounts) into electrical enery. Think of this cold rod as the linkage between to working gears. It is a energy transducer. And out the other ends of the coils comes the leftover water...however cold it is (cant be colder than the rod, so probably not frozen) and discharge is behind the boat (so your not sucking it in again).

The second law of thermodynamics says simply "you cant transfer energy from a cold body to a warm body, and you cant cool off a cold body with a warm body...heat will always transfer from the warmer source to the colder source." If you have a rod that is colder than the ocean water picking up heat, and then thransferring this heat into motion. yes, theoretically it will work.

In real life...hell no. Too much heat will be lost from the rod into the enviroment, and any heat that did make to the other end of the rod would barely be enough to power a boat. Although if you use engines to get the boat going and use this system only to keep the boat cruising...just maybe.

But it doesnt violate any laws, just proly wont work.

Anakha1
28-01-2004, 16:46
I know what he's talking about and as I said, that's not possible. Sucking the heat energy out of the water would cost more energy than you would get.

Heat engines only work if you have a temperature difference. However with a boat on an ocean, you're not going to have a temperature difference unless you create one. Since no process is 100% energy efficient (ain't no such thing as a closed system), creating a temperature difference will cost more energy than you'll get out of it when you use the resulting temperature difference to drive some sort of heat engine.

Ah, I see. I'll take your word for it since physics and I haven't gotten along ever since I started defying it. I just don't understand it.

*travels faster than the speed of light just to show off*