First Law of Thermodynamics: History of the Concept of Energy
video description
Date: 2022-12-27
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 19
Brian
Your video ignores the contribution of an American engineer called Benjamin Thompson. He made a big breakthrough in 1789 when he proved that heat did not have mass. Up until his paper the prevailing theory was the caloric theory of heat, which assumed that heat was a fundamental element and so had mass, and which could not be created or destroyed or transformed into anything else. In 1785, when aged 32, he fled to Europe because he had supported the wrong side in the American Revolution. He moved to Bavaria in Germany where he spent about twelve years, and some of his duties there were to reorganize the army and to establish workhouses for the poor. He made studies on the fuels used for lighting, heating and cooking, including their relative costs and efficiencies.
In 1797 he was working in Munich, the capital city of Bavaria, and he was made responsible for the boring of cannon barrels using sharp cutting tools in a lathe-like machine. He observed that when the blade became blunt, the lathe had to work harder using more energy. At the same time the barrel became hotter. This suggested to him that there might be a link between work and heat and that heat could be a form of energy not mass. He made a series of measurements on the cannons linking the amount of work to the rise in temperature of the cannon. He began to realize that the link between work and heat was that heat was a form of energy not the caloric matter of the current scientific thinking. He published a paper in 1798 entitled, An Experimental Enquiry Concerning the Source of the Heat which is Excited by Friction where he argued that heat was not caloric matter but that heat and work and motion are all forms of energy. Thompson (now Count Rumford) described how he immersed a cannon barrel in water and arranged for a blunted cutting tool. He showed that while he was cutting the barrel the water could be boiled and that the supply of frictional heat continued as long as the machine kept boring. He pointed out that the weight of the cannon and the material removed remained the same no matter how much work was done or how hot the barrel became. He also noted that the only thing communicated to the barrel was the energy of motion. This was a fundamental breakthrough that rejected the caloric theory of heat, the accepted theory of the day, so naturally his work was met with hostility. But it was subsequently important in establishing the first law of thermodynamics.
reply
Your video ignores the contribution of an American engineer called Benjamin Thompson. He made a big breakthrough in 1789 when he proved that heat did not have mass. Up until his paper the prevailing theory was the caloric theory of heat, which assumed that heat was a fundamental element and so had mass, and which could not be created or destroyed or transformed into anything else. In 1785, when aged 32, he fled to Europe because he had supported the wrong side in the American Revolution. He moved to Bavaria in Germany where he spent about twelve years, and some of his duties there were to reorganize the army and to establish workhouses for the poor. He made studies on the fuels used for lighting, heating and cooking, including their relative costs and efficiencies.
In 1797 he was working in Munich, the capital city of Bavaria, and he was made responsible for the boring of cannon barrels using sharp cutting tools in a lathe-like machine. He observed that when the blade became blunt, the lathe had to work harder using more energy. At the same time the barrel became hotter. This suggested to him that there might be a link between work and heat and that heat could be a form of energy not mass. He made a series of measurements on the cannons linking the amount of work to the rise in temperature of the cannon. He began to realize that the link between work and heat was that heat was a form of energy not the caloric matter of the current scientific thinking. He published a paper in 1798 entitled, An Experimental Enquiry Concerning the Source of the Heat which is Excited by Friction where he argued that heat was not caloric matter but that heat and work and motion are all forms of energy. Thompson (now Count Rumford) described how he immersed a cannon barrel in water and arranged for a blunted cutting tool. He showed that while he was cutting the barrel the water could be boiled and that the supply of frictional heat continued as long as the machine kept boring. He pointed out that the weight of the cannon and the material removed remained the same no matter how much work was done or how hot the barrel became. He also noted that the only thing communicated to the barrel was the energy of motion. This was a fundamental breakthrough that rejected the caloric theory of heat, the accepted theory of the day, so naturally his work was met with hostility. But it was subsequently important in establishing the first law of thermodynamics.
reply
GregChase
The hydrogen atom is a perpetual motion machine and a closed system. All atoms are like that. At time 19: 16 in the video, the wiki page stating 'perpetual motion machines. are impossible'
Our small group started with the 1798 gravity experiment of Cavendish, which showed that all matter objects create a gravity field, and put to ourselves the question How does one proton in the nucleus and one orbiting electron - aka the hydrogen atom - create its tiny gravity field?
Since our Sun is composed of 75% hydrogen and around 24% helium, and has an immense gravity field, it seemed fair to put to ourselves this question of a single hydrogen atom - which qualifies as an object of matter - how it creates its gravity field.
Further, the positively-charged proton and the negatively-charged electron is a charge separation.
In most of our experience, charge separations quench very quickly, but a hydrogen atom never does. The electron-proton dipole is persistent, and the charge separation is persistent. A copper wire if connected across the charge separation created by a battery will quench it very quickly with the result being a dead battery.
It's quite challenging to look at the most basic atom and ask why the persistent charge separation, and how does it create its gravity field?
The claim that 'no closed system can sustain perpetual motion' is a misleading statement at best. Everything in our existence is 100% reliant on perpetual motion machines at the atomic scale.
Thank you kindly for the coverage of du Chatelet - wow she was brilliant. She was way, way ahead of her time.
reply
The hydrogen atom is a perpetual motion machine and a closed system. All atoms are like that. At time 19: 16 in the video, the wiki page stating 'perpetual motion machines. are impossible'
Our small group started with the 1798 gravity experiment of Cavendish, which showed that all matter objects create a gravity field, and put to ourselves the question How does one proton in the nucleus and one orbiting electron - aka the hydrogen atom - create its tiny gravity field?
Since our Sun is composed of 75% hydrogen and around 24% helium, and has an immense gravity field, it seemed fair to put to ourselves this question of a single hydrogen atom - which qualifies as an object of matter - how it creates its gravity field.
Further, the positively-charged proton and the negatively-charged electron is a charge separation.
In most of our experience, charge separations quench very quickly, but a hydrogen atom never does. The electron-proton dipole is persistent, and the charge separation is persistent. A copper wire if connected across the charge separation created by a battery will quench it very quickly with the result being a dead battery.
It's quite challenging to look at the most basic atom and ask why the persistent charge separation, and how does it create its gravity field?
The claim that 'no closed system can sustain perpetual motion' is a misleading statement at best. Everything in our existence is 100% reliant on perpetual motion machines at the atomic scale.
Thank you kindly for the coverage of du Chatelet - wow she was brilliant. She was way, way ahead of her time.
reply
Eric
You are the Scheherazade of scientific exposition. 1, 001 nights later, we'll figure it all out.
But this episode, in particular, is a wonderful one. Today, we all learn about energy, momentum, force, power, etc, in high school physics. But one can imagine how back in the beginnings of the Enlightenment Era, people (scientists in particular) were blindly groping trying to find out what useful measure, what proper metric, can be used to quantify. what? What were they looking at that needed quantifying? Everything back then was a miasma of confusing concepts. Top all that off with tools and measuring devices with large intrinsic margins of errors (especially for time. Heck, even the concept of time back then was (at least, societally) fundamentally inaccurate.
And it's wonderful to highlight women who participated in the progress of science. She was, at least to me, a hidden figure among scientists.
reply
You are the Scheherazade of scientific exposition. 1, 001 nights later, we'll figure it all out.
But this episode, in particular, is a wonderful one. Today, we all learn about energy, momentum, force, power, etc, in high school physics. But one can imagine how back in the beginnings of the Enlightenment Era, people (scientists in particular) were blindly groping trying to find out what useful measure, what proper metric, can be used to quantify. what? What were they looking at that needed quantifying? Everything back then was a miasma of confusing concepts. Top all that off with tools and measuring devices with large intrinsic margins of errors (especially for time. Heck, even the concept of time back then was (at least, societally) fundamentally inaccurate.
And it's wonderful to highlight women who participated in the progress of science. She was, at least to me, a hidden figure among scientists.
reply
Jim
Liked the presentation. I've heard of this French gal before. Read somewhere. and there were a couple documentaries on PBS a few years back. I think that the questions that Nature often asks are very subtle, so to speak. There in lies the rub: in some ways, the discovery is typically like being in the right time at the right time. if you get the innuendo. Then you have to be alert enough to be aware that 'something unusual happened, ' in a manner of speaking. And you have to have the gumption to do the follow-up. So, in effect, you have to have 3 'ifs' in a row to happen in just the right way. Such a rare set of events. At this point, most of the complaint is self-explanatory. 1) the event 2) the astute observation 3) gumption of the follow-up
reply
Liked the presentation. I've heard of this French gal before. Read somewhere. and there were a couple documentaries on PBS a few years back. I think that the questions that Nature often asks are very subtle, so to speak. There in lies the rub: in some ways, the discovery is typically like being in the right time at the right time. if you get the innuendo. Then you have to be alert enough to be aware that 'something unusual happened, ' in a manner of speaking. And you have to have the gumption to do the follow-up. So, in effect, you have to have 3 'ifs' in a row to happen in just the right way. Such a rare set of events. At this point, most of the complaint is self-explanatory. 1) the event 2) the astute observation 3) gumption of the follow-up
reply
Neil
Sorry Kathy, but your a little wide of the mark. William Thomson didn't become Lord Kelvin on being g knighted but when he was ennobled. In 1866 Queen Victoria knighted him make Mr William Thomson sir William Thomson. In 1892 he was ennobled, which simply means that he was made a Member of the House of Lords (the UK's upper parliamentary chamber, this is when he became Lord Kelvin of Largs, taking his title after the river that flows past Glasgow University and the Ayrshire town. As an aside, Glasgow University, my alma mater, is the 4th oldest university in the Englush speaking world after Oxford, Cambridge and Saint Andrews (25th oldest in Europe) celebrates its 571st anniversary of its founding this year.
reply
Sorry Kathy, but your a little wide of the mark. William Thomson didn't become Lord Kelvin on being g knighted but when he was ennobled. In 1866 Queen Victoria knighted him make Mr William Thomson sir William Thomson. In 1892 he was ennobled, which simply means that he was made a Member of the House of Lords (the UK's upper parliamentary chamber, this is when he became Lord Kelvin of Largs, taking his title after the river that flows past Glasgow University and the Ayrshire town. As an aside, Glasgow University, my alma mater, is the 4th oldest university in the Englush speaking world after Oxford, Cambridge and Saint Andrews (25th oldest in Europe) celebrates its 571st anniversary of its founding this year.
reply
Trucmuche
It's a shame that the movie Einstein's big idea with Madame du Chatelet and Voltaire got it wrong.
They make a bet about how far in clay the ball would go. Twice as far or 4 times as far. The answer is four times as far.
. except that it's true only with small balls that travel very deep in the clay. You can compare the depth of the pit they produce because most of the energy is used to deepen the pit. The energy used for the initial half-sphere is negligible and can be ignored. But in the clip, the balls barely entered the clay. The clay imprint showed that was supposed to prove that the energy was four-time as much would have in reality needed about 15 times more energy.
reply
It's a shame that the movie Einstein's big idea with Madame du Chatelet and Voltaire got it wrong.
They make a bet about how far in clay the ball would go. Twice as far or 4 times as far. The answer is four times as far.
. except that it's true only with small balls that travel very deep in the clay. You can compare the depth of the pit they produce because most of the energy is used to deepen the pit. The energy used for the initial half-sphere is negligible and can be ignored. But in the clip, the balls barely entered the clay. The clay imprint showed that was supposed to prove that the energy was four-time as much would have in reality needed about 15 times more energy.
reply
Stuart
Wonderful Kathy. When I learned (really only some superficial equations but it was enough for Pharmacy ) thermodynamics in the early 1970s the lecturer was really good but he left out all of the slow struggle and history of the very gradual process that you describe so well. He didnt even mention the crucial role of the Industrial Revolution and steam engines, mores the pity. Just a small unscientific addition - when Thomson was knighted in 1866 he became Sir William Thomson (as shown on the title page of one of the publications you pictured) and he didnt become Lord Kelvin until his ennoblement in 1892.
reply
Wonderful Kathy. When I learned (really only some superficial equations but it was enough for Pharmacy ) thermodynamics in the early 1970s the lecturer was really good but he left out all of the slow struggle and history of the very gradual process that you describe so well. He didnt even mention the crucial role of the Industrial Revolution and steam engines, mores the pity. Just a small unscientific addition - when Thomson was knighted in 1866 he became Sir William Thomson (as shown on the title page of one of the publications you pictured) and he didnt become Lord Kelvin until his ennoblement in 1892.
reply
Douglas
Wonderful history! Thank you, Kathy.
I wish we could add just a bit more to the video to say how the brilliant Emmy Noether came along in 1918 and reconnected energy and momentum into something remarkably simple. She showed that the conservation of energy is just another way of saying that physical laws dont change over time, and that conservation of momentum is just another way of saying that physical laws dont change with position in space. Then we could have started and ended with two brilliant women, Emilie Chatelet and Emmy Noether!
reply
Wonderful history! Thank you, Kathy.
I wish we could add just a bit more to the video to say how the brilliant Emmy Noether came along in 1918 and reconnected energy and momentum into something remarkably simple. She showed that the conservation of energy is just another way of saying that physical laws dont change over time, and that conservation of momentum is just another way of saying that physical laws dont change with position in space. Then we could have started and ended with two brilliant women, Emilie Chatelet and Emmy Noether!
reply
Castleridge
Hi Kathy!
I just came upon your videos, and they are sensational! Your knowledge of the various topics, your enthusiasm, and, above all, your PIZZAZZ makes you so very, shall we say, 'contagious'! Your explanations, as well as your inclusion of information not presented in any other formats that I have seen, creates a more complete picture that truly benefits us 'novices' along the path to Nirvana. Thank you for your astounding presentations! BTW, I have always found very bright and intelligent women a true turn-on!
reply
Hi Kathy!
I just came upon your videos, and they are sensational! Your knowledge of the various topics, your enthusiasm, and, above all, your PIZZAZZ makes you so very, shall we say, 'contagious'! Your explanations, as well as your inclusion of information not presented in any other formats that I have seen, creates a more complete picture that truly benefits us 'novices' along the path to Nirvana. Thank you for your astounding presentations! BTW, I have always found very bright and intelligent women a true turn-on!
reply
Jeff
Einstein in his special theory of relativity finally settled the feud between the advocates of dead energy (momentum) and live energy (kinetic energy. Einstein replaced a three-dimensional world (x, y, z in Cartesian coordinates) with a four-dimension world (x, y, z, t where t is time. Momentum has three spatial components (in x, y, and z) while the kinetic energy represents the component in the fourth (time) dimension. The laws of conservation of momentum and conservation of energy are thus combined into a single equation.
reply
Einstein in his special theory of relativity finally settled the feud between the advocates of dead energy (momentum) and live energy (kinetic energy. Einstein replaced a three-dimensional world (x, y, z in Cartesian coordinates) with a four-dimension world (x, y, z, t where t is time. Momentum has three spatial components (in x, y, and z) while the kinetic energy represents the component in the fourth (time) dimension. The laws of conservation of momentum and conservation of energy are thus combined into a single equation.
reply
Claudio
Kathy, this is my second lecture of yours that I am watching. Its really good that you dig into the original materials. And I enjoy your style of presenting the history of physics. Thanks! Concerning the concept of energy, I wonder if the Bernoulli brothers are worth mentioning. Were they not the first ones to use the concept of internal energy and among the first to impose energy conservation? Thanks
reply
Kathy, this is my second lecture of yours that I am watching. Its really good that you dig into the original materials. And I enjoy your style of presenting the history of physics. Thanks! Concerning the concept of energy, I wonder if the Bernoulli brothers are worth mentioning. Were they not the first ones to use the concept of internal energy and among the first to impose energy conservation? Thanks
reply
Jim
Hi, Kathy. I really enjoy your videos. Somewhere you asked for topics people would like covered. I would like you to talk about the relationship between Heisenberg's matrix approach to quantum mechanics and Schroedinger's wave equation approach - the approaches themselves, their similarities and differences and how they were discovered. Thanks again for your videos.
reply
Hi, Kathy. I really enjoy your videos. Somewhere you asked for topics people would like covered. I would like you to talk about the relationship between Heisenberg's matrix approach to quantum mechanics and Schroedinger's wave equation approach - the approaches themselves, their similarities and differences and how they were discovered. Thanks again for your videos.
reply
Keith
I don't think that William Thompson was knighted but rather was elevated to the House of Lords. There is a distinct difference between a knighthood and a lordship, mostly based on social class in England, lord being above the knight in rank. Lots more details to it but this is the gist of it. A fascinating historical topic in itself but. not in physics. :)
reply
I don't think that William Thompson was knighted but rather was elevated to the House of Lords. There is a distinct difference between a knighthood and a lordship, mostly based on social class in England, lord being above the knight in rank. Lots more details to it but this is the gist of it. A fascinating historical topic in itself but. not in physics. :)
reply
George
The ball drop experiment into clay had some obvious clues. Even though the speed of the ball was only double, the height of release had to be four times greater. So even if you didn't have the formula for kinetic energy that uses velocity squared, you could deduce that the damage to the clay would be four times greater just from the release height.
reply
The ball drop experiment into clay had some obvious clues. Even though the speed of the ball was only double, the height of release had to be four times greater. So even if you didn't have the formula for kinetic energy that uses velocity squared, you could deduce that the damage to the clay would be four times greater just from the release height.
reply
John
Thank you, Kathy, I love you.
Nowadays we would add Charge to the Potential side of the Types of Energy card (20: 07, like a capacitor can store electrical charge.
But I guess there are other things we could squeeze into this card too.
Keep up the good work, and have a good one, Kathy.
reply
Thank you, Kathy, I love you.
Nowadays we would add Charge to the Potential side of the Types of Energy card (20: 07, like a capacitor can store electrical charge.
But I guess there are other things we could squeeze into this card too.
Keep up the good work, and have a good one, Kathy.
reply
Who
42. The answer to life, the universe, and everything
I rather think the question is:
Why is there something rather than nothing
If you count up the letters and spaces in the question (but disturbingly not including a question mark, there are 42.
Incidentally, I am currently also 42.
reply
42. The answer to life, the universe, and everything
I rather think the question is:
Why is there something rather than nothing
If you count up the letters and spaces in the question (but disturbingly not including a question mark, there are 42.
Incidentally, I am currently also 42.
reply
Carlos
This is amazing. So important to us and our young people that progress (ie. Continually decreasing local entropy) is a process. That these icons didnt think of everything at once. That each one developed and refined their theories over years.
You just inspired me to be kinder to myself.
reply
This is amazing. So important to us and our young people that progress (ie. Continually decreasing local entropy) is a process. That these icons didnt think of everything at once. That each one developed and refined their theories over years.
You just inspired me to be kinder to myself.
reply
Ethan
There's a line in Singing In the Rain where a young woman in a movie audience says, She's so refined. I think I'll kill myself.
Genius, wealth, social standing, and ravishing beauty. It's like, tell me she had bad breath, or I'll have to shoot myself from feelings of inadequacy.
reply
There's a line in Singing In the Rain where a young woman in a movie audience says, She's so refined. I think I'll kill myself.
Genius, wealth, social standing, and ravishing beauty. It's like, tell me she had bad breath, or I'll have to shoot myself from feelings of inadequacy.
reply
onlyeyeno
Mdme du Chatelet appears to have been one of the truly great minds, just imagine what more she could have accomplished had she not so tragically died before her time.
Thanks for a great video on an interesting subject that I knew all too little of.
Best regards.
reply
Mdme du Chatelet appears to have been one of the truly great minds, just imagine what more she could have accomplished had she not so tragically died before her time.
Thanks for a great video on an interesting subject that I knew all too little of.
Best regards.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
