Chapter VI: The Differences of the Energies and the Limits of the Principle of

ENERGY.

Of every quantity of heat _Q_ which does work in a reversible process (one unaccompanied by loss) between the absolute temperatures _T₁_, _T₂_, only the portion

_(T₁-T₂)/T₁_

is transformed into work, while the remainder is transferred to the lower temperature-level _T₂_. This transferred portion can, upon the reversal of the process, with the same expenditure of work, again be brought back to the level _T₁_. But if the process is not reversible, then more heat than in the foregoing case flows to the lower level, and the surplus can no longer be brought back to the higher level _T₂_ without some _special_ expenditure. W. Thomson (1852), accordingly, drew attention to the fact, that in all non-reversible, that is, in all real thermal processes, quantities of heat are lost for mechanical work, and that accordingly a dissipation or waste of mechanical energy is taking place. In all cases, heat is only partially transformed into work, but frequently work is wholly transformed into heat. Hence, a tendency exists towards a diminution of the _mechanical_ energy and towards an increase of the _thermal_ energy of the world.

For a simple, closed cyclical process, accompanied by no loss, in which the quantity of heat _Q₁_ is taken from the level _T₁_, and the quantity _Q₂_ is deposited upon the level _T₂_, the following relation, agreeably to equation (2), exists,

_-(Q₁/T₁) + (Q₂/T₂) = 0_.

Similarly, for any number of compound reversible cycles Clausius finds the algebraical sum

_[sum]Q/T = 0_,

and supposing the temperature to change continuously,

_[integral]dQ/T = 0_ (4)

Here the elements of the quantities of heat deducted from a given level are reckoned negative, and the elements imparted to it, positive. If the process is not reversible, then expression (4), which Clausius calls _entropy_, increases. In actual practice this is always the case, and Clausius finds himself led to the statement:

1. That the energy of the world remains constant.

2. That the entropy of the world tends toward a maximum.

Once we have noted the above-indicated conformity in the behavior of different energies, the _peculiarity_ of thermal energy here mentioned must strike us. Whence is this peculiarity derived, for, generally every energy passes only partly into another form, which is also true of thermal energy? The explanation will be found in the following.

Every transformation of a special kind of energy _A_ is accompanied with a fall of potential of that particular kind of energy, including heat. But whilst for the other kinds of energy a transformation and therefore a loss of energy on the part of the kind sinking in potential is connected with the fall of the potential, with heat the case is different. Heat can suffer a fall of potential without sustaining a loss of energy, at least according to the customary mode of estimation. If a weight sinks, it must create perforce kinetic energy, or heat, or some other form of energy. Also, an electrical charge cannot suffer a fall of potential without loss of energy, i. e., without transformation. But heat can pass with a fall of temperature to a body of greater capacity and the same thermal energy still be preserved, so long as we regard _every quantity_ of heat as energy. This it is that gives to heat, besides its property of energy, in many cases the character of a material _substance_, or quantity.

If we look at the matter in an unprejudiced light, we must ask if there is any scientific sense or purpose in still considering as energy a quantity of heat that can no longer be transformed into mechanical work, (for example, the heat of a closed equably warmed material system). The principle of energy certainly plays in this case a wholly superfluous rôle, which is assigned to it only from habit.[58] To maintain the principle of energy in the face of a knowledge of the dissipation or waste of mechanical energy, in the face of the increase of entropy is equivalent almost to the liberty which Black took when he regarded the heat of liquefaction as still present but latent.[59] It is to be remarked further, that the expressions "energy of the world" and "entropy of the world" are slightly permeated with scholasticism. Energy and entropy are _metrical_ notions. What meaning can there be in applying these notions to a case in which they are not applicable, in which their values are not determinable?

If we could really determine the entropy of the world it would represent a true, absolute measure of time. In this way is best seen the utter tautology of a statement that the entropy of the world increases with the time. Time, and the fact that certain changes take place only in a definite sense, are one and the same thing.