For the reversible isothermal expansion of an ideal gas: $${∆H}={∆U}=0 \tag1$$ This is obvious for the case of internal energy because $${∆U} = \frac {3}{2} n R {∆T} = 0 \tag2$$ and $${∆U} = -C_P n {∆T} = 0 \tag3$$ For the case of enthalpy it is easy to see that $${∆H} = -C_v n {∆T} = 0 \tag4$$ I've also seen $${∆H} = ∆U + ∆(PV) = ∆U + nR{∆T} = 0 \tag5$$ Now for the part I don't understand. $$dH = dU + PdV \tag6$$ $$dH = dU + nRT \frac {dV}{V} \tag7$$ $${∆H} = {∆U} + nRT \ln\frac {V_2}{V_1} \tag8$$ $${∆H} = 0 + nRT \ln\frac {V_2}{V_1} = \ln\frac {V_2}{V_1} ≠ 0\tag9$$ Clearly, it is incorrect to make the substitution $ P = nRT/V$ in going from $(6)$ to $(7)$. Why is that? I thought equation $(6)$ was always valid, and integrating such a substitution should account for any change in the variables throughout the process. Why does this not yield the same answer as $(4)$ and $(5)$?


$$H = U + PV \Rightarrow$$

$$dH = dU +PdV + VdP\tag{6}$$

In other words, equation 6 is missing the $VdP$ term.

$$dH = dU + nRT \frac{dV}{V} + nRT \frac{dP}{P}\tag{7}$$

$$ \Delta H = \Delta U + nRT \ln\frac{V_2}{V_1} + nRT \ln\frac{P_2}{P_1}\tag{8}$$

$$P_1 V_1 = P_2 V_2 \text{ (isothermal)}$$

$$\Delta H = \Delta U + nRT \left( \ln\frac{V_2}{V_1} + \ln\frac{V_1}{V_2} \right) = \Delta U = 0\tag{9}$$

  • $\begingroup$ I've never seen it written with a $ VdP $ term. My book presents it as written in $ (6) $ for an ideal gas. Are there certain situations in which $ VdP $ must be included, and others where it is acceptable to just use $ PdV $? $\endgroup$ – David Feb 26 '14 at 15:21
  • $\begingroup$ Books omit the VdP term for constant pressure situations, because it is zero. All other situations require the VdP term. H = U + PV is by definition. Then, using the product rule for derivatives you immediately obtain dH = dU +PdV + VdP. $\endgroup$ – DavePhD Feb 26 '14 at 15:27
  • $\begingroup$ In the Carnot cycle, the amount of work done in moving along an isotherm is calculated without the $ VdP $ term. In looking at the PV diagram, the pressure isn't constant. How can the term be ignored in such a case then? $\endgroup$ – David Feb 26 '14 at 15:30
  • $\begingroup$ Is it because P varies as a function of V? Whereas in the situation I described it does not? The situations seem analogous to me, but they are clearly not. $\endgroup$ – David Feb 26 '14 at 15:32
  • $\begingroup$ H is enthalpy, not work. dW = Fdx = PAdx = PdV, where F is force, x is distantce, A is area. $\endgroup$ – DavePhD Feb 26 '14 at 15:41

$$PV =nRT$$ So, for constant temperature, $dU=0$.

So, $H=PV$

The term $PV = 0$, so h= Because pv=constant


protected by AccidentalFourierTransform Aug 11 '18 at 13:55

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.