• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 09:09
CEST 15:09
KST 22:09
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
TL.net Map Contest #21: Voting9[ASL20] Ro4 Preview: Descent11Team TLMC #5: Winners Announced!3[ASL20] Ro8 Preview Pt2: Holding On9Maestros of the Game: Live Finals Preview (RO4)5
Community News
BSL Team A vs Koreans - Sat-Sun 16:00 CET4Weekly Cups (Oct 6-12): Four star herO85.0.15 Patch Balance Hotfix (2025-10-8)80Weekly Cups (Sept 29-Oct 5): MaxPax triples up3PartinG joins SteamerZone, returns to SC2 competition32
StarCraft 2
General
TL.net Map Contest #21: Voting Stellar Fest: StarCraft II returns to Canada herO Talks: Poor Performance at EWC and more... Revisiting the game after10 years and wow it's bad Weekly Cups (Oct 6-12): Four star herO
Tourneys
$1,200 WardiTV October (Oct 21st-31st) WardiTV Mondays RSL Offline Finals Dates + Ticket Sales! SC4ALL $6,000 Open LAN in Philadelphia Crank Gathers Season 2: SC II Pro Teams
Strategy
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 495 Rest In Peace Mutation # 494 Unstable Environment Mutation # 493 Quick Killers Mutation # 492 Get Out More
Brood War
General
BSL Team A vs Koreans - Sat-Sun 16:00 CET BW General Discussion Question regarding recent ASL Bisu vs Larva game [Interview] Grrrr... 2024 Pros React To: BarrackS + FlaSh Coaching vs SnOw
Tourneys
[ASL20] Semifinal B SC4ALL $1,500 Open Bracket LAN [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [ASL20] Semifinal A
Strategy
Relatively freeroll strategies BW - ajfirecracker Strategy & Training Current Meta Siegecraft - a new perspective
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile Dawn of War IV Nintendo Switch Thread ZeroSpace Megathread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion LiquidDota to reintegrate into TL.net
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
SPIRED by.ASL Mafia {211640} TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Men's Fashion Thread Sex and weight loss
Fan Clubs
The herO Fan Club! The Happy Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece Series you have seen recently... Movie Discussion!
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion MLB/Baseball 2023 NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
SC2 Client Relocalization [Change SC2 Language] Linksys AE2500 USB WIFI keeps disconnecting Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List Recent Gifted Posts
Blogs
The Heroism of Pepe the Fro…
Peanutsc
Rocket League: Traits, Abili…
TrAiDoS
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1370 users

Simple thermodynamics question, What do you think?

Blogs > Jonoman92
Post a Reply
Normal
Jonoman92
Profile Blog Joined September 2006
United States9104 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-19 05:46:16
April 18 2011 21:51 GMT
#1
edit: Updated with my response, thanks for the discussion.

Just had this question on a test. I think it's just a poorly thought-out question and the answer is somewhat up to interpretation. What do TL'ers think? Obviously only answer if you think you know what the answer should be and feel free to give an explanation.


"When a thermometer is submerged in a liquid, the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics tells us that the temperature of the thermometer is the same as that of the liquid"

a) True
b) False


Poll: So...

False (48)
 
80%

True (12)
 
20%

60 total votes

Your vote: So...

(Vote): True
(Vote): False



I'll hold off a bit on saying what I answered and why.

Fun fact: This is the first google image results for "thermodynamics" as I've just discovered:
[image loading]


+ Show Spoiler +

I said false thinking that the zeroth law wasn't applicable since there weren't 3 distinct objects/systems present and the question never mentions anything about equilibrium or if the thermometer has been submerged for a long period of time.


KlaCkoN
Profile Blog Joined May 2007
Sweden1661 Posts
April 18 2011 21:55 GMT
#2
Assuming that the system is in thermal equlibrium yes.
However the question says nothing about that so the correct answer should be "not necessarily"? I dunnu.
"Voice or no voice the people can always be brought to the bidding of their leaders ... All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."
NukeTheBunnys
Profile Joined July 2010
United States1004 Posts
April 18 2011 21:58 GMT
#3
its not necessarily equal, if you heat up the thermometer then put it into liquid it would take time to reach equilibrium
When you play the game of drones you win or you die.
Pufftrees
Profile Joined March 2009
2449 Posts
April 18 2011 21:59 GMT
#4
On April 19 2011 06:55 KlaCkoN wrote:
Assuming that the system is in thermal equlibrium yes.
However the question says nothing about that so the correct answer should be "not necessarily"? I dunnu.


Didn't take very long for someone to nail it.
Chance favors the prepared mind.
redoxx
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States333 Posts
April 18 2011 22:00 GMT
#5
I'd say yes. q= m *C *deltaT right? Also, that comic is pretty funny haha
The horror...the horror
WarChimp
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
Australia943 Posts
April 18 2011 22:14 GMT
#6
Its a shame I know nothing of this subject, I hate looking at pictures and not understanding what it means. I feel like I am missing out on a joke... perhaps someone can explain the comic to me?
Froadac
Profile Blog Joined July 2009
United States6733 Posts
April 18 2011 22:15 GMT
#7
On April 19 2011 07:14 WarChimp wrote:
Its a shame I know nothing of this subject, I hate looking at pictures and not understanding what it means. I feel like I am missing out on a joke... perhaps someone can explain the comic to me?

Thermodynamics state that the universe is heading into increased (entropy) chaos.
Myles
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States5162 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-18 22:20:23
April 18 2011 22:18 GMT
#8
I've never heard of the Zeroth Law, so after Googling it I found it's a generalization about things in equilibrium. As such, I think if something is following the Zeroth Law that you would assume it's in equilibrium or else the Zeroth law wouldn't apply at all.

EDIT; However, in this case I think the answer would be false because the Zeroth law deals with 3 objects, not two.
Moderator
Chill
Profile Blog Joined January 2005
Calgary25986 Posts
April 18 2011 22:18 GMT
#9
I don't get why everyone voted yes. In my eyes, this situation isn't even related to the zeroth law of thermodynamics.

So no.
Moderator
Chill
Profile Blog Joined January 2005
Calgary25986 Posts
April 18 2011 22:19 GMT
#10
On April 19 2011 07:18 Myles wrote:
I've never heard of the Zeroth Law, so after Googling it I found it's a generalization about things in equilibrium. As such, I think if something is following the Zeroth Law that you would assume it's in equilibrium or else the Zeroth law wouldn't apply at all.

It also talks about three bodies. As such, should we just assume there's some other relevent third body too? O_o
Moderator
Froadac
Profile Blog Joined July 2009
United States6733 Posts
April 18 2011 22:21 GMT
#11
On April 19 2011 07:19 Chill wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 07:18 Myles wrote:
I've never heard of the Zeroth Law, so after Googling it I found it's a generalization about things in equilibrium. As such, I think if something is following the Zeroth Law that you would assume it's in equilibrium or else the Zeroth law wouldn't apply at all.

It also talks about three bodies. As such, should we just assume there's some other relevent third body too? O_o

Yeah. Was reading it on wikipedia, and where the hell is the third body o.o
Myles
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States5162 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-18 22:23:19
April 18 2011 22:22 GMT
#12
On April 19 2011 07:19 Chill wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 07:18 Myles wrote:
I've never heard of the Zeroth Law, so after Googling it I found it's a generalization about things in equilibrium. As such, I think if something is following the Zeroth Law that you would assume it's in equilibrium or else the Zeroth law wouldn't apply at all.

It also talks about three bodies. As such, should we just assume there's some other relevent third body too? O_o


Yup(well, no to your question...but you get it), after stepping back for a second it became clear this is just a cleverly disguised question on whether you know what the Zeroth law is, not whether anything is actually in equilibrium.
Moderator
dudeman001
Profile Blog Joined February 2010
United States2412 Posts
April 18 2011 22:25 GMT
#13
On April 19 2011 07:21 Froadac wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 07:19 Chill wrote:
On April 19 2011 07:18 Myles wrote:
I've never heard of the Zeroth Law, so after Googling it I found it's a generalization about things in equilibrium. As such, I think if something is following the Zeroth Law that you would assume it's in equilibrium or else the Zeroth law wouldn't apply at all.

It also talks about three bodies. As such, should we just assume there's some other relevent third body too? O_o

Yeah. Was reading it on wikipedia, and where the hell is the third body o.o

If there's no 3rd body, then doesn't that mean the Zeroth Law isn't telling us anything in this situation so the answer is just false?
Sup.
SirazTV
Profile Joined May 2010
United States209 Posts
April 18 2011 22:34 GMT
#14
That is an example of a question that is a terrible true or false question. Both answers are wrong as the temperature could be the same or different.
Myles
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States5162 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-18 22:37:22
April 18 2011 22:36 GMT
#15
On April 19 2011 07:34 SirazTV wrote:
That is an example of a question that is a terrible true or false question. Both answers are wrong as the temperature could be the same or different.


It's actually not. The question isn't about the temperature or equilibrium at all. It's about what the Zeroth Law tells us, which in this case is nothing because the Zeroth law applies to 3 bodies, not 2.
Moderator
Chill
Profile Blog Joined January 2005
Calgary25986 Posts
April 18 2011 22:38 GMT
#16
On April 19 2011 07:34 SirazTV wrote:
That is an example of a question that is a terrible true or false question. Both answers are wrong as the temperature could be the same or different.

But even if it's the same, the zeroth law doesn't tell us that.
Moderator
Dragar
Profile Joined October 2010
United Kingdom971 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-18 23:01:35
April 18 2011 22:39 GMT
#17
It's a combination of the first and second laws of thermodynamics that tells you an object placed in contact with a thermal reservoir (allowing heat to pass between them) will result in the thermometer measuring the temperature of the liquid (eventually).

Assuming the thermometer is intended to be the object and the liquid is well approximated as a thermal reservoir, and that the thermometer actually works (sort of by definition it must, or it's not a thermometer), anyway.

You do need the zeroth law I think, to define what is meant by thermal equilibrium though. So in that sense it's true.

Also I've written the word thermometer so many times it no longer looks like a real word any more.
KlaCkoN
Profile Blog Joined May 2007
Sweden1661 Posts
April 18 2011 22:39 GMT
#18
On April 19 2011 07:25 dudeman001 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 07:21 Froadac wrote:
On April 19 2011 07:19 Chill wrote:
On April 19 2011 07:18 Myles wrote:
I've never heard of the Zeroth Law, so after Googling it I found it's a generalization about things in equilibrium. As such, I think if something is following the Zeroth Law that you would assume it's in equilibrium or else the Zeroth law wouldn't apply at all.

It also talks about three bodies. As such, should we just assume there's some other relevent third body too? O_o

Yeah. Was reading it on wikipedia, and where the hell is the third body o.o

If there's no 3rd body, then doesn't that mean the Zeroth Law isn't telling us anything in this situation so the answer is just false?

Ugg yeah, re-reading the question and remembering what the zeroth law actually says I think that's right.
Stupid question imo :p
"Voice or no voice the people can always be brought to the bidding of their leaders ... All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."
eluv
Profile Joined August 2010
United States1251 Posts
April 18 2011 22:42 GMT
#19
Just a badly written question is all. Happens all the time on tests unfortunately. If really pushed I'd go with "no" because the zeroth law doesn't seem to have much to do with this situation, but I wouldn't feel good about it.
"Yes I fucked my way to the GSL partnership" - Sundance
SirazTV
Profile Joined May 2010
United States209 Posts
April 18 2011 22:46 GMT
#20
On April 19 2011 07:36 Myles wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 07:34 SirazTV wrote:
That is an example of a question that is a terrible true or false question. Both answers are wrong as the temperature could be the same or different.


It's actually not. The question isn't about the temperature or equilibrium at all. It's about what the Zeroth Law tells us, which in this case is nothing because the Zeroth law applies to 3 bodies, not 2.



Lol, you are completely missing the point of the Zeroth Law of thermodynamics.........

The point is that the liquid, glass, mercury, and air are all in equilibrium with each other. Without the zeroth law even if the liquid and glass were in equilibrium and the glass and mercury were in equilibrium. The liquid and mercury would not be in equilibrium. Without this it would be impossible to measure temperature.

Look, just because in grade school math A=B, B=C ==> A=C does not mean it is always the case.

SirazTV
Profile Joined May 2010
United States209 Posts
April 18 2011 22:48 GMT
#21
On April 19 2011 07:38 Chill wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 07:34 SirazTV wrote:
That is an example of a question that is a terrible true or false question. Both answers are wrong as the temperature could be the same or different.

But even if it's the same, the zeroth law doesn't tell us that.



But then there is not enough information to answer the question. Lack of information =/= false.
Dragar
Profile Joined October 2010
United Kingdom971 Posts
April 18 2011 22:49 GMT
#22
The 'three bodies' thing is a bit of a red herring, yes. The point is that thermal equilibrium doesn't really mean much without the zeroth law, as there's no way you can use "A is in equilibrium with B" to infer anything else about B or A (even as trivial as "B is in equilibrium with A" doesn't neccessarily follow).
Myles
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States5162 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-18 22:59:37
April 18 2011 22:55 GMT
#23
On April 19 2011 07:46 SirazTV wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 07:36 Myles wrote:
On April 19 2011 07:34 SirazTV wrote:
That is an example of a question that is a terrible true or false question. Both answers are wrong as the temperature could be the same or different.


It's actually not. The question isn't about the temperature or equilibrium at all. It's about what the Zeroth Law tells us, which in this case is nothing because the Zeroth law applies to 3 bodies, not 2.



Lol, you are completely missing the point of the Zeroth Law of thermodynamics.........

The point is that the liquid, glass, mercury, and air are all in equilibrium with each other. Without the zeroth law even if the liquid and glass were in equilibrium and the glass and mercury were in equilibrium. The liquid and mercury would not be in equilibrium. Without this it would be impossible to measure temperature.

Look, just because in grade school math A=B, B=C ==> A=C does not mean it is always the case.




Huh? I think you're reading a bit too much into the question. It's says nothing about anything being in equilibrium. It talks about two bodies, the thermometer and the liquid. Talking about the components of the thermometer, or the air or the glass is adding extra info that isn't given. As pointed out by others, we have no idea at what temperature anything is at or how long the things have been in contact.

The whole question is does Zeroth law tell you that the two objects are in equilibrium, which is no.
Moderator
APurpleCow
Profile Blog Joined August 2008
United States1372 Posts
April 18 2011 23:16 GMT
#24
On April 19 2011 07:48 SirazTV wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 07:38 Chill wrote:
On April 19 2011 07:34 SirazTV wrote:
That is an example of a question that is a terrible true or false question. Both answers are wrong as the temperature could be the same or different.

But even if it's the same, the zeroth law doesn't tell us that.



But then there is not enough information to answer the question. Lack of information =/= false.


Nope.

You are not answering true/false as to whether or not the temperature is the same, but to whether or not the zeroth law says it is. Since there's no third system, it doesn't, so the answer is false.
palanq
Profile Blog Joined December 2004
United States761 Posts
April 18 2011 23:25 GMT
#25
does the 0th law of thermodynamics tell you that the temperatures are the same? No, the 0th law of thermodynamics is a principle about thermal equilibrium between three bodies. false.

this question is not poorly written nor is it open to interpretation.
time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana
Dragar
Profile Joined October 2010
United Kingdom971 Posts
April 18 2011 23:25 GMT
#26
The zeroth law applies to two systems (you let system 2 and system 3 be the same system), so you can't use that argument.
Chill
Profile Blog Joined January 2005
Calgary25986 Posts
April 18 2011 23:26 GMT
#27
On April 19 2011 07:48 SirazTV wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 07:38 Chill wrote:
On April 19 2011 07:34 SirazTV wrote:
That is an example of a question that is a terrible true or false question. Both answers are wrong as the temperature could be the same or different.

But even if it's the same, the zeroth law doesn't tell us that.



But then there is not enough information to answer the question. Lack of information =/= false.

Read the question and then read the answers. Lack of information does equal false in this case.

I don't know how people are confusing this question. It doesn't even state the thermometer is at equilibrium with the liquid, just that it's submerged. The liquid could be ice water and the thermometer could be a hundred degrees. That's not at equilibrium so the zeroth law doesn't tell us anything in this situation.
Moderator
Dragar
Profile Joined October 2010
United Kingdom971 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-18 23:46:42
April 18 2011 23:28 GMT
#28
Well part of interpreting exam questions is understanding the context, and half of a physics exam is making the appropriate assumptions. It's hardly a surprise people are making sensible assumptions given the question (e.g. that 'submerged' means it's been there long enough to thermalise with the surroundings), but since it's either badly worded or a trick question, it's not entirely clear what those assumptions should be.
okum
Profile Blog Joined February 2009
France5778 Posts
April 18 2011 23:36 GMT
#29
On April 19 2011 07:48 SirazTV wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 07:38 Chill wrote:
On April 19 2011 07:34 SirazTV wrote:
That is an example of a question that is a terrible true or false question. Both answers are wrong as the temperature could be the same or different.

But even if it's the same, the zeroth law doesn't tell us that.


But then there is not enough information to answer the question. Lack of information =/= false.

Usually a true/false question is understood as asking whether a proposition is a tautology, i.e. whether it is true for every allowed value of the variables involved.
Flash fan before it was cool | Coiner of "jangbang"
Yurie
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
11906 Posts
April 18 2011 23:36 GMT
#30
When such a question strikes you ask the teacher holding the exam what he/she is asking with the question. Not being able to understand a poorly formulated/constructed question shouldn't lose you points.

Since we can't do that (answering afterwards) I would have to go with false due to the reasons others have stated. Not enough information equals false.

Another option would be to expand upon the question options, tick false and then give a reason so you show you understood the material but that the question tricked you if you answer incorrectly. (This doesn't work if it is scanned and just checks the area for the answer and automagically corrects it afterwards.)
Jonoman92
Profile Blog Joined September 2006
United States9104 Posts
April 18 2011 23:39 GMT
#31
Thanks for the responses so far. Yurie, that's a good idea.
n.DieJokes
Profile Blog Joined November 2008
United States3443 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-19 00:01:35
April 18 2011 23:44 GMT
#32
Eventually yes, they'll be the same temperature (thermo equilibrium) so true

Edit: Clarification: An important corollary of the zeroth law is as follows "Two systems are in thermal equilibrium if and only if they have the same temperature"

Second Edit: I went back and checked my text just to make sure, they mention this exact example (I assume its the standard example), the only reason a thermometer is useful is because it measures its own temperature which, by zeroth law, is the temperature of its surrounding. Ignore the formal 3 bodies definition, that's not whats important.

Third Edit: Granted the question is ambiguous as whether or not the thermometer is in equilibrium with the water but, because it doesn't say one way or another, we can logically assume that it is since we're talking about a thermometer. Its only use is when its in equilibrium and it reaches that relatively quickly, I think the other posters in this thread are over thinking it
MyLove + Your Love= Supa Love
Dragar
Profile Joined October 2010
United Kingdom971 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-19 00:04:44
April 19 2011 00:04 GMT
#33
Ah, but DieJokes, the thermometer only has the temperature of the surroundings thanks to the first and second laws.

I don't think it's a very good question but you are probably right, that is what the teacher is trying to get at with the question.
Vertig0
Profile Joined March 2009
United States196 Posts
April 19 2011 00:27 GMT
#34
Chill nailed it. The question isn't whether the thermometer and liquid are the same temperature, it's whether the Zeroth Law tells you that they are, which it clearly doesn't.
#1 Fruitdealer fan!
Grobyc
Profile Blog Joined June 2008
Canada18410 Posts
April 19 2011 00:30 GMT
#35
On April 19 2011 06:55 KlaCkoN wrote:
Assuming that the system is in thermal equlibrium yes.
However the question says nothing about that so the correct answer should be "not necessarily"? I dunnu.

Yeah this is what I figure as well.
If you watch Godzilla backwards it's about a benevolent lizard who helps rebuild a city and then moonwalks into the ocean.
Chimpalimp
Profile Joined May 2010
United States1135 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-19 01:01:54
April 19 2011 01:00 GMT
#36
I get dumb questions like these in physics all the time, they try to fake that they are ambiguous. But if you sit down and think about it, you really just have to look at the wording of the question. The wording asks about the Zeroth law, meaning you are verifying whether or not the situation follows the zeroth law (regardless of what the result of the situation is).

I always hated them.
I like money. You like money too? We should hang out.
n.DieJokes
Profile Blog Joined November 2008
United States3443 Posts
April 19 2011 01:04 GMT
#37
On April 19 2011 09:04 Dragar wrote:
Ah, but DieJokes, the thermometer only has the temperature of the surroundings thanks to the first and second laws.

I don't think it's a very good question but you are probably right, that is what the teacher is trying to get at with the question.

Well, not directly right? As I understand it (I'm a first year chem major) the zeroth law came after the other three so it was discovered using the intuitive concepts that followed from the but it is fundamental to all three of them (hence zeroth). So sure you could come up with that from the first two, but the first two don't actually say that.
On April 19 2011 09:27 Vertig0 wrote:
Chill nailed it. The question isn't whether the thermometer and liquid are the same temperature, it's whether the Zeroth Law tells you that they are, which it clearly doesn't.

The zeroth law does tell you this, but not directly from the formal definition. If you look in your texts they'll describe exactly this situation as an application of the zeroth law, a cursory glance at the wiki isn't sufficient (not to say you did that, but I think some other people in the thread have; please don't take any of this personally I don't mean it to be)
MyLove + Your Love= Supa Love
Dragar
Profile Joined October 2010
United Kingdom971 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-19 01:24:53
April 19 2011 01:10 GMT
#38
On April 19 2011 10:04 n.DieJokes wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 09:04 Dragar wrote:
Ah, but DieJokes, the thermometer only has the temperature of the surroundings thanks to the first and second laws.

I don't think it's a very good question but you are probably right, that is what the teacher is trying to get at with the question.

Well, not directly right? As I understand it (I'm a first year chem major) the zeroth law came after the other three so it was discovered using the intuitive concepts that followed from the but it is fundamental to all three of them (hence zeroth). So sure you could come up with that from the first two, but the first two don't actually say that.


Sort of directly. Thermometers work (in the sense that they reach the same temperature as their surroundings) because of the first and second laws.

(I think the simplest way to put is is that the first law tells us how heat and entropy are related, and the second law tells us how entropy behaves - the combination allowing us to deduce how heat will flow between the thermometer and its surroundings when out of equilibrium.)

The zeroth law is indeed fundamental, as it gives you a meaning behind temperature (equilibrium) in the first place.
n.DieJokes
Profile Blog Joined November 2008
United States3443 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-19 01:29:14
April 19 2011 01:21 GMT
#39
On April 19 2011 10:10 Dragar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 10:04 n.DieJokes wrote:
On April 19 2011 09:04 Dragar wrote:
Ah, but DieJokes, the thermometer only has the temperature of the surroundings thanks to the first and second laws.

I don't think it's a very good question but you are probably right, that is what the teacher is trying to get at with the question.

Well, not directly right? As I understand it (I'm a first year chem major) the zeroth law came after the other three so it was discovered using the intuitive concepts that followed from the but it is fundamental to all three of them (hence zeroth). So sure you could come up with that from the first two, but the first two don't actually say that.


Sort of directly. Thermometers work (i.e. they reach the same temperature as their surroundings) because of the first and second laws. The zeroth law is indeed fundamental, as it gives you a meaning behind temperature in the first place.

I get what you're saying, but the zeroth tells us that they will have exactly the same temperature at equilibrium; you can't get that directly from the first or more importantly the second law.

Edit: That seems ambiguous; the second law says energy is conserved in the system and acts in such a way as to decrease potential energy. So from this the thermometer will heat or cool depending on its surrounds and vice versa. It's the zeroth law that tells us that this system reaches equilibrium if and only if they have exactly the same temperature. It doesn't matter what the materials are, they will reach the same temp.
MyLove + Your Love= Supa Love
jenzebubble
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States183 Posts
April 19 2011 01:22 GMT
#40
On April 19 2011 07:46 SirazTV wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 07:36 Myles wrote:
On April 19 2011 07:34 SirazTV wrote:
That is an example of a question that is a terrible true or false question. Both answers are wrong as the temperature could be the same or different.


It's actually not. The question isn't about the temperature or equilibrium at all. It's about what the Zeroth Law tells us, which in this case is nothing because the Zeroth law applies to 3 bodies, not 2.



Lol, you are completely missing the point of the Zeroth Law of thermodynamics.........

The point is that the liquid, glass, mercury, and air are all in equilibrium with each other. Without the zeroth law even if the liquid and glass were in equilibrium and the glass and mercury were in equilibrium. The liquid and mercury would not be in equilibrium. Without this it would be impossible to measure temperature.

Look, just because in grade school math A=B, B=C ==> A=C does not mean it is always the case.



I can think of no system where using the operator =, A, B and C the way that you have and with the parameters that you have, that a person would be unable to infer a relationship between A and C. Perhaps choose your operators better next time you decide to be a smarmy ass.
"It's like waxing your balls, it hurts like a biiiitch but after they are silky smooth...." -Kennigit
getSome[703]
Profile Blog Joined December 2009
United States753 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-19 01:23:00
April 19 2011 01:22 GMT
#41
On April 19 2011 08:26 Chill wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 07:48 SirazTV wrote:
On April 19 2011 07:38 Chill wrote:
On April 19 2011 07:34 SirazTV wrote:
That is an example of a question that is a terrible true or false question. Both answers are wrong as the temperature could be the same or different.

But even if it's the same, the zeroth law doesn't tell us that.



But then there is not enough information to answer the question. Lack of information =/= false.

Read the question and then read the answers. Lack of information does equal false in this case.

I don't know how people are confusing this question. It doesn't even state the thermometer is at equilibrium with the liquid, just that it's submerged. The liquid could be ice water and the thermometer could be a hundred degrees. That's not at equilibrium so the zeroth law doesn't tell us anything in this situation.


Basically this. You are not given enough information for the zeroth law to apply, so the answer is false. Pretty easy question as long as you don't overthink it.
Running Log! http://www.runningahead.com/logs/5081b4d7a4a94c5e8fa20b01e668dfb6/calendar
Dragar
Profile Joined October 2010
United Kingdom971 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-19 01:35:27
April 19 2011 01:26 GMT
#42
On April 19 2011 10:21 n.DieJokes wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 10:10 Dragar wrote:
On April 19 2011 10:04 n.DieJokes wrote:
On April 19 2011 09:04 Dragar wrote:
Ah, but DieJokes, the thermometer only has the temperature of the surroundings thanks to the first and second laws.

I don't think it's a very good question but you are probably right, that is what the teacher is trying to get at with the question.

Well, not directly right? As I understand it (I'm a first year chem major) the zeroth law came after the other three so it was discovered using the intuitive concepts that followed from the but it is fundamental to all three of them (hence zeroth). So sure you could come up with that from the first two, but the first two don't actually say that.


Sort of directly. Thermometers work (i.e. they reach the same temperature as their surroundings) because of the first and second laws. The zeroth law is indeed fundamental, as it gives you a meaning behind temperature in the first place.

I get what you're saying, but the zeroth tells us that they will have exactly the same temperature at equilibrium; you can't get that directly from the first or more importantly the second law.


Yes, I don't disagree. But you will have no reason to believe a thermometer is ever in equilibrium with its surroundings without the other laws.

Edit: I saw your edit. Yes, precisely (although we do still need the first law to relate energy to heat!).
n.DieJokes
Profile Blog Joined November 2008
United States3443 Posts
April 19 2011 01:36 GMT
#43
On April 19 2011 10:26 Dragar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 10:21 n.DieJokes wrote:
On April 19 2011 10:10 Dragar wrote:
On April 19 2011 10:04 n.DieJokes wrote:
On April 19 2011 09:04 Dragar wrote:
Ah, but DieJokes, the thermometer only has the temperature of the surroundings thanks to the first and second laws.

I don't think it's a very good question but you are probably right, that is what the teacher is trying to get at with the question.

Well, not directly right? As I understand it (I'm a first year chem major) the zeroth law came after the other three so it was discovered using the intuitive concepts that followed from the but it is fundamental to all three of them (hence zeroth). So sure you could come up with that from the first two, but the first two don't actually say that.


Sort of directly. Thermometers work (i.e. they reach the same temperature as their surroundings) because of the first and second laws. The zeroth law is indeed fundamental, as it gives you a meaning behind temperature in the first place.

I get what you're saying, but the zeroth tells us that they will have exactly the same temperature at equilibrium; you can't get that directly from the first or more importantly the second law.


Yes, I don't disagree. But you will have no reason to believe a thermometer is ever in equilibrium with its surroundings without the other laws.

Ah, I get it. lol, I don't have any good response to that, seems like a valid issue... I just assumed the other laws were in effect. It feels to nit picky to me, idk
MyLove + Your Love= Supa Love
turdburgler
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
England6749 Posts
April 19 2011 01:38 GMT
#44
the answer is no

the question says WHEN the blah blah blah

but heat takes time to flow from 1 thing to another so at the moment its submerged they wont have the exact same temperature
Dragar
Profile Joined October 2010
United Kingdom971 Posts
April 19 2011 01:46 GMT
#45
On April 19 2011 10:36 n.DieJokes wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 10:26 Dragar wrote:
On April 19 2011 10:21 n.DieJokes wrote:
On April 19 2011 10:10 Dragar wrote:
On April 19 2011 10:04 n.DieJokes wrote:
On April 19 2011 09:04 Dragar wrote:
Ah, but DieJokes, the thermometer only has the temperature of the surroundings thanks to the first and second laws.

I don't think it's a very good question but you are probably right, that is what the teacher is trying to get at with the question.

Well, not directly right? As I understand it (I'm a first year chem major) the zeroth law came after the other three so it was discovered using the intuitive concepts that followed from the but it is fundamental to all three of them (hence zeroth). So sure you could come up with that from the first two, but the first two don't actually say that.


Sort of directly. Thermometers work (i.e. they reach the same temperature as their surroundings) because of the first and second laws. The zeroth law is indeed fundamental, as it gives you a meaning behind temperature in the first place.

I get what you're saying, but the zeroth tells us that they will have exactly the same temperature at equilibrium; you can't get that directly from the first or more importantly the second law.


Yes, I don't disagree. But you will have no reason to believe a thermometer is ever in equilibrium with its surroundings without the other laws.

Ah, I get it. lol, I don't have any good response to that, seems like a valid issue... I just assumed the other laws were in effect. It feels to nit picky to me, idk


It is nit picky, but so is physics.

It's a badly worded question.
Jonoman92
Profile Blog Joined September 2006
United States9104 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-19 05:45:54
April 19 2011 05:44 GMT
#46
Oh btw updated the OP with how I answered (I said false). Taking the exam almost made me angry because I had a feeling false was the better answer, but that she wanted true.... so dumb. Got it back today and the "correct" answer was true. Going to "ask" her about it on Wednesday during office hours and get owned since she's the prof.

I can see it now...

".... no you don't understand, people on the sc website TOLD ME SO!!!"

edit: btw Chill broke the poll once he posted, it was like 6 true, 1 false at one point.
n.DieJokes
Profile Blog Joined November 2008
United States3443 Posts
April 19 2011 06:18 GMT
#47
On April 19 2011 14:44 Jonoman92 wrote:
Oh btw updated the OP with how I answered (I said false). Taking the exam almost made me angry because I had a feeling false was the better answer, but that she wanted true.... so dumb. Got it back today and the "correct" answer was true. Going to "ask" her about it on Wednesday during office hours and get owned since she's the prof.

I can see it now...

".... no you don't understand, people on the sc website TOLD ME SO!!!"

edit: btw Chill broke the poll once he posted, it was like 6 true, 1 false at one point.

I still think true is the answer that's most in the spirit of the question. Every argument I've heard otherwise is really ballbustingly technical for a true false but gl!
MyLove + Your Love= Supa Love
Chill
Profile Blog Joined January 2005
Calgary25986 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-19 15:07:20
April 19 2011 15:06 GMT
#48
On April 19 2011 14:44 Jonoman92 wrote:
Oh btw updated the OP with how I answered (I said false). Taking the exam almost made me angry because I had a feeling false was the better answer, but that she wanted true.... so dumb. Got it back today and the "correct" answer was true. Going to "ask" her about it on Wednesday during office hours and get owned since she's the prof.

I can see it now...

".... no you don't understand, people on the sc website TOLD ME SO!!!"

edit: btw Chill broke the poll once he posted, it was like 6 true, 1 false at one point.

I can't accept this answer. The word that rubs me the wrong way is "submerged".

Obviously the intent is that when something is submerged in a liquid for long enough, they are at thermal equilibrium. This question makes no statement on time.

Clearly you can see me holding an icecube submerged in a hot glass of coffee and one second later asking this question. Are they the same temperature? Fuck no. Will they be in a minute? Yes of course.

Things don't necessarily need to be the same temperature to be in thermal equilibrium; however, Qin must equal Qout. There is zero energy generation from a thermometer. If the thermometer is hotter than the liquid, there is going to be heat dissipation through conduction, at the minimum. This system isn't in thermal equilibrium.

Yes, it could be in thermal equilibrium, but the question never states that. If we're going to start making assumptions like that, well then you'd better just quit this class because you can just start assuming every system has an efficiency of 0% and thus transfers zero mass and finish your final in 2 seconds.
Moderator
Risen
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States7927 Posts
April 19 2011 19:02 GMT
#49
On April 20 2011 00:06 Chill wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 19 2011 14:44 Jonoman92 wrote:
Oh btw updated the OP with how I answered (I said false). Taking the exam almost made me angry because I had a feeling false was the better answer, but that she wanted true.... so dumb. Got it back today and the "correct" answer was true. Going to "ask" her about it on Wednesday during office hours and get owned since she's the prof.

I can see it now...

".... no you don't understand, people on the sc website TOLD ME SO!!!"

edit: btw Chill broke the poll once he posted, it was like 6 true, 1 false at one point.

I can't accept this answer. The word that rubs me the wrong way is "submerged".

Obviously the intent is that when something is submerged in a liquid for long enough, they are at thermal equilibrium. This question makes no statement on time.

Clearly you can see me holding an icecube submerged in a hot glass of coffee and one second later asking this question. Are they the same temperature? Fuck no. Will they be in a minute? Yes of course.

Things don't necessarily need to be the same temperature to be in thermal equilibrium; however, Qin must equal Qout. There is zero energy generation from a thermometer. If the thermometer is hotter than the liquid, there is going to be heat dissipation through conduction, at the minimum. This system isn't in thermal equilibrium.

Yes, it could be in thermal equilibrium, but the question never states that. If we're going to start making assumptions like that, well then you'd better just quit this class because you can just start assuming every system has an efficiency of 0% and thus transfers zero mass and finish your final in 2 seconds.


Had a kid in one of my classes try to be a smartass and write assumptions all over his final. He got to retake it because the professor felt bad giving the kid a fail due to one moment of stupidity.
Pufftrees Everyday>its like a rifter that just used X-Factor/Liquid'Nony: I hope no one lip read XD/Holyflare>it's like policy lynching but better/Resident Los Angeles bachelor
Normal
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
CranKy Ducklings
10:00
Master Swan Open #97
CranKy Ducklings80
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Lowko373
IndyStarCraft 175
LamboSC2 147
BRAT_OK 49
MindelVK 32
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 34421
Calm 10346
Rain 5300
actioN 2047
Horang2 1980
Bisu 1496
GuemChi 1462
Flash 1017
Hyuk 975
Jaedong 812
[ Show more ]
Mini 407
firebathero 367
Last 248
Stork 236
Hyun 191
Soulkey 123
Barracks 101
hero 82
ggaemo 72
ToSsGirL 60
JYJ47
sas.Sziky 45
Backho 38
Aegong 27
Free 26
Sacsri 20
sSak 19
soO 17
scan(afreeca) 13
HiyA 10
ivOry 10
Dota 2
Gorgc2458
XcaliburYe1049
420jenkins477
Fuzer 217
KheZu92
Counter-Strike
byalli220
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor294
Other Games
summit1g15710
singsing2591
B2W.Neo745
DeMusliM369
Mew2King174
ToD26
Trikslyr14
Organizations
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 15 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH173
• StrangeGG 44
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• Ler73
League of Legends
• Nemesis4635
• Jankos2433
Upcoming Events
BSL Team A[vengers]
51m
Bonyth vs Paralyze
StRyKeR vs Ample
Safe House 2
3h 51m
Sparkling Tuna Cup
20h 51m
Safe House 2
1d 3h
Monday Night Weeklies
2 days
WardiTV Invitational
2 days
WardiTV Invitational
3 days
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
4 days
The PondCast
4 days
WardiTV Invitational
5 days
[ Show More ]
Online Event
6 days
RSL Revival
6 days
RSL Revival
6 days
WardiTV Invitational
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Acropolis #4 - TS2
WardiTV TLMC #15
HCC Europe

Ongoing

BSL 21 Points
ASL Season 20
CSL 2025 AUTUMN (S18)
C-Race Season 1
IPSL Winter 2025-26
EC S1
Thunderpick World Champ.
CS Asia Championships 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual

Upcoming

SC4ALL: Brood War
BSL Season 21
BSL 21 Team A
BSL 21 Non-Korean Championship
RSL Offline Finals
RSL Revival: Season 3
Stellar Fest
SC4ALL: StarCraft II
CranK Gathers Season 2: SC II Pro Teams
eXTREMESLAND 2025
ESL Impact League Season 8
SL Budapest Major 2025
BLAST Rivals Fall 2025
IEM Chengdu 2025
PGL Masters Bucharest 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.