In common language, English 'heat' or 'warmth', just as French
chaleur, German
Hitze or
Wärme,
Latin calor,
Greek θάλπος, etc. refers to either
thermal energy or
temperature, or the human
perception of these. Later,
chaleur (as used by
Sadi Carnot), 'heat', and
Wärme became equivalents also as specific scientific terms at an early stage of thermodynamics. Speculation on 'heat' as a separate form of matter has a long history, involving the
phlogiston theory, the
caloric theory, and
fire. Many careful and accurate historical experiments practically exclude friction, mechanical and thermodynamic work and matter transfer, investigating transfer of energy only by thermal conduction and radiation. Such experiments give impressive rational support to the caloric theory of heat. To account also for changes of internal energy due to friction, and mechanical and thermodynamic work, the caloric theory was, around the end of the eighteenth century, replaced by the "mechanical" theory of heat, which is accepted today.
17th century–early 18th century "Heat is motion" As scientists of the early modern age began to adopt the view that matter consists of particles, a close relationship between heat and the motion of those particles was widely surmised, or even the equivalency of the concepts, boldly expressed by the English philosopher
Francis Bacon in 1620. "It must not be thought that heat generates motion, or motion heat (though in some respects this be true), but that the very essence of heat ... is motion and nothing else." "not a ... motion of the whole, but of the small particles of the body." In
The Assayer (published 1623)
Galileo Galilei, in turn, described heat as an artifact of our minds. Galileo wrote that heat and pressure are apparent properties only, caused by the movement of particles, which is a real phenomenon. In 1665, and again in 1681, English polymath
Robert Hooke reiterated that heat is nothing but the motion of the constituent particles of objects, and in 1675, his colleague, Anglo-Irish scientist
Robert Boyle repeated that this motion is what heat consists of. Heat has been discussed in ordinary language by philosophers. An example is this 1720 quote from the English philosopher
John Locke: When Bacon, Galileo, Hooke, Boyle and Locke wrote "heat", they might more have referred to what we would now call "temperature". No clear distinction was made between heat and temperature until the mid-18th century, nor between the internal energy of a body and the transfer of energy as heat until the mid-19th century. Locke's description of heat was repeatedly quoted by English physicist
James Prescott Joule. Also the
transfer of heat was explained by the motion of particles. Scottish physicist and chemist
Joseph Black wrote: "Many have supposed that heat is a tremulous ... motion of the particles of matter, which ... motion they imagined to be communicated from one body to another."
John Tyndall's
Heat Considered as Mode of Motion (1863) was instrumental in popularizing the idea of heat as motion to the English-speaking public. The theory was developed in academic publications in French, English and German.
18th century Heat vs. temperature Unstated distinctions between heat and “hotness” may be very old, heat seen as something dependent on the
quantity of a hot substance, “heat”, vaguely perhaps distinct from the
quality of "hotness". In 1723, the English mathematician
Brook Taylor measured the temperature—the expansion of the liquid in a thermometer—of mixtures of various amounts of hot water in cold water. As expected, the increase in temperature was in proportion to the proportion of hot water in the mixture. The distinction between heat and temperature is implicitly expressed in the last sentence of his report.
Evaporative cooling In 1748, an account was published in
The Edinburgh Physical and Literary Essays of an experiment by the Scottish physician and chemist
William Cullen. Cullen had used an
air pump to lower the pressure in a container with
diethyl ether. The ether boiled, while no heat was withdrawn from it, and its temperature decreased. And in 1758 on a warm day in
Cambridge, England,
Benjamin Franklin and fellow scientist
John Hadley experimented by continually wetting the ball of a mercury
thermometer with ether and using
bellows to evaporate the ether. With each subsequent
evaporation, the thermometer read a lower temperature, eventually reaching .
Discovery of specific heat In 1756 or soon thereafter, Joseph Black, Cullen’s friend and former assistant, began an extensive study of heat. In 1760 Black realized that when two different substances of equal mass but different temperatures are mixed, the changes in number of degrees in the two substances differ, though the heat gained by the cooler substance and lost by the hotter is the same. Black related an experiment conducted by
Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit on behalf of Dutch physician
Herman Boerhaave. For clarity, he then described a hypothetical but realistic variant of the experiment: If equal masses of 100 °F water and 150 °F mercury are mixed, the water temperature increases by 20 ° and the mercury temperature decreases by 30 ° (both arriving at 120 °F), even though the heat gained by the water and lost by the mercury is the same. This clarified the distinction between heat and temperature. It also introduced the concept of
specific heat capacity, being different for different substances. Black wrote: "Quicksilver [mercury] ... has less capacity for the matter of heat than water."
Degrees of heat In his investigations of specific heat, Black used a unit of heat he called "degrees of heat"—as opposed to just "degrees" [of temperature]. This unit was context-dependent and could only be used when circumstances were identical. It was based on change in temperature multiplied by the mass of the substance involved.
Discovery of latent heat It was known that when the air temperature rises above freezing—air then becoming the obvious heat source—snow melts very slowly and the temperature of the melted snow is close to its freezing point. In 1757, Black started to investigate if heat, therefore, was required for the melting of a solid, independent of any rise in temperature. As far Black knew, the general view at that time was that melting was inevitably accompanied by a small increase in temperature, and that no additional heat was needed beyond what this increase in temperature would require in itself. Soon, however, Black was able to show that much more heat was required during melting than could be explained by any increase in temperature alone. He was also able to show that heat is
released by a liquid during its freezing; again, much more than could be explained by the decrease of its temperature alone. In 1762, Black announced the following research and results to a society of professors at the University of Glasgow. Black had placed equal masses of ice at 32 °F (0 °C) and water at 33 °F (0.6 °C) respectively in two identical, well separated containers. The water and the ice were both evenly heated to 40 °F by the air in the room, which was at a constant 47 °F (8 °C). The water had therefore received 40 – 33 = 7 “degrees of heat”. The ice had been heated for 21 times longer and had therefore received 7 × 21 = 147 “degrees of heat”. The temperature of the ice had increased by 8 °F. The ice had thus absorbed 8 “degrees of heat”, which Black called
sensible heat, manifest as temperature change, which could be felt and measured. In addition to that, 147 – 8 = 139 “degrees of heat” were absorbed as
latent heat, manifest as phase change rather than as temperature change. Black next showed that a water temperature of 176 °F was needed to melt an equal mass of ice until it was all 32 °F. So now 176 – 32 = 144 “degrees of heat” seemed to be needed to melt the ice. The modern value for the heat of fusion of ice would be 143 “degrees of heat” on the same scale (79.5 “degrees of heat Celsius”). Finally, Black increased the temperature of a mass of water, then vaporized an equal mass of water by even heating. He showed that 830 “degrees of heat” was needed for the vaporization; again based on the time required. The modern value for the heat of vaporization of water would be 967 “degrees of heat” on the same scale.
First calorimeter A calorimeter is a device used for measuring
heat capacity, as well as the heat absorbed or released in
chemical reactions or
physical changes. In 1780, French chemist
Antoine Lavoisier used such an apparatus—which he named 'calorimeter'—to investigate the heat released by
respiration, by observing how this heat melted snow surrounding his apparatus. A so called
ice calorimeter was used 1782–83 by Lavoisier and his colleague
Pierre-Simon Laplace to measure the heat released in various chemical reactions. The heat so released melted a specific amount of ice, and the heat required for the melting of a certain amount of ice was known beforehand.
Classical thermodynamics The modern understanding of heat is often partly attributed to
Thompson's 1798
mechanical theory of heat ("
An Inquiry Concerning the Source of the Heat Which Is Excited by Friction"), postulating a
mechanical equivalent of heat. A collaboration between
Nicolas Clément and
Sadi Carnot (
Reflections on the Motive Power of Fire) in the 1820s had some related thinking along similar lines. In 1842,
Julius Robert Mayer frictionally generated heat in paper pulp and measured the temperature rise. In 1845, Joule published a paper entitled
The Mechanical Equivalent of Heat, in which he specified a numerical value for the amount of mechanical work required to "produce a unit of heat", based on heat production by friction in the passage of electricity through a resistor and in the rotation of a paddle in a vat of water. The theory of classical thermodynamics matured in the 1850s to 1860s.
Clausius (1850) In 1850, Clausius, responding to Joule's experimental demonstrations of heat production by friction, rejected the caloric doctrine of conservation of heat, writing: The process function was introduced by
Rudolf Clausius in 1850. Clausius described it with the German compound
Wärmemenge, translated as "amount of heat".
Bryan (1907) In 1907, G.H. Bryan published an investigation of the foundations of thermodynamics,
Thermodynamics: an Introductory Treatise dealing mainly with First Principles and their Direct Applications, B.G. Teubner, Leipzig. Bryan was writing when thermodynamics had been established empirically, but people were still interested to specify its logical structure. The 1909 work of Carathéodory also belongs to this historical era. Bryan was a physicist while Carathéodory was a mathematician. Bryan started his treatise with an introductory chapter on the notions of heat and of temperature. He gives an example of where the notion of heating as raising a body's temperature contradicts the notion of heating as imparting a quantity of heat to that body. He defined an adiabatic transformation as one in which the body neither gains nor loses heat. This is not the same as defining an adiabatic transformation as one that occurs to a body enclosed by walls impermeable to radiation and conduction. He recognized calorimetry as a way of measuring quantity of heat. He recognized water as having a
temperature of maximum density. This makes water unsuitable as a thermometric substance around that temperature. He intended to remind readers of why thermodynamicists preferred an absolute scale of temperature, independent of the properties of a particular thermometric substance. His second chapter started with the recognition of friction as a source of heat, by
Benjamin Thompson, by
Humphry Davy, by
Robert Mayer, and by
James Prescott Joule. He stated the
First Law of Thermodynamics, or
Mayer–Joule Principle as follows: :::::When heat is transformed into work or conversely work is transformed into heat, the quantity of heat gained or lost is proportional to the quantity of work lost or gained. He wrote: :::::If heat be measured in dynamical units the mechanical equivalent becomes equal to unity, and the equations of thermodynamics assume a simpler and more symmetrical form.
Carathéodory (1909) A celebrated and frequent definition of heat in thermodynamics is based on the work of
Carathéodory (1909), referring to processes in a closed system. Carathéodory was responding to a suggestion by Max Born that he examine the logical structure of thermodynamics. The
internal energy of a body in an arbitrary state can be determined by amounts of work adiabatically performed by the body on its surroundings when it starts from a reference state . Such work is assessed through quantities defined in the surroundings of the body. It is supposed that such work can be assessed accurately, without error due to friction in the surroundings; friction in the body is not excluded by this definition. The adiabatic performance of work is defined in terms of adiabatic walls, which allow transfer of energy as work, but no other transfer, of energy or matter. In particular they do not allow the passage of energy as heat. According to this definition, work performed adiabatically is in general accompanied by friction within the thermodynamic system or body. On the other hand, according to Carathéodory (1909), there also exist non-adiabatic,
diathermal walls, which are postulated to be permeable only to heat. For the definition of quantity of energy transferred as heat, it is customarily envisaged that an arbitrary state of interest is reached from state by a process with two components, one adiabatic and the other not adiabatic. For convenience one may say that the adiabatic component was the sum of work done by the body through volume change through movement of the walls while the non-adiabatic wall was temporarily rendered adiabatic, and of isochoric adiabatic work. Then the non-adiabatic component is a process of energy transfer through the wall that passes only heat, newly made accessible for the purpose of this transfer, from the surroundings to the body. The change in internal energy to reach the state from the state is the difference of the two amounts of energy transferred. Although Carathéodory himself did not state such a definition, following his work it is customary in theoretical studies to define heat, , to the body from its surroundings, in the combined process of change to state from the state , as the change in internal energy, , minus the amount of work, , done by the body on its surrounds by the adiabatic process, so that . In this definition, for the sake of conceptual rigour, the quantity of energy transferred as heat is not specified directly in terms of the non-adiabatic process. It is defined through knowledge of precisely two variables, the change of internal energy and the amount of adiabatic work done, for the combined process of change from the reference state to the arbitrary state . It is important that this does not explicitly involve the amount of energy transferred in the non-adiabatic component of the combined process. It is assumed here that the amount of energy required to pass from state to state , the change of internal energy, is known, independently of the combined process, by a determination through a purely adiabatic process, like that for the determination of the internal energy of state above. The rigour that is prized in this definition is that there is one and only one kind of energy transfer admitted as fundamental: energy transferred as work. Energy transfer as heat is considered as a derived quantity. The uniqueness of work in this scheme is considered to guarantee rigor and purity of conception. The conceptual purity of this definition, based on the concept of energy transferred as work as an ideal notion, relies on the idea that some frictionless and otherwise non-dissipative processes of energy transfer can be realized in physical actuality. The second law of thermodynamics, on the other hand, assures us that such processes are not found in nature. Before the rigorous mathematical definition of heat based on Carathéodory's 1909 paper, historically, heat, temperature, and thermal equilibrium were presented in thermodynamics textbooks as jointly
primitive notions. Carathéodory introduced his 1909 paper thus: "The proposition that the discipline of thermodynamics can be justified without recourse to any hypothesis that cannot be verified experimentally must be regarded as one of the most noteworthy results of the research in thermodynamics that was accomplished during the last century." Referring to the "point of view adopted by most authors who were active in the last fifty years", Carathéodory wrote: "There exists a physical quantity called heat that is not identical with the mechanical quantities (mass, force, pressure, etc.) and whose variations can be determined by calorimetric measurements."
James Serrin introduces an account of the theory of thermodynamics thus: "In the following section, we shall use the classical notions of
heat,
work, and
hotness as primitive elements, ... That heat is an appropriate and natural primitive for thermodynamics was already accepted by Carnot. Its continued validity as a primitive element of thermodynamical structure is due to the fact that it synthesizes an essential physical concept, as well as to its successful use in recent work to unify different constitutive theories." This traditional kind of presentation of the basis of thermodynamics includes ideas that may be summarized by the statement that heat transfer is purely due to spatial non-uniformity of temperature, and is by conduction and radiation, from hotter to colder bodies. It is sometimes proposed that this traditional kind of presentation necessarily rests on "
circular reasoning". This alternative approach to the definition of quantity of energy transferred as heat differs in logical structure from that of Carathéodory, recounted just above. This alternative approach admits calorimetry as a primary or direct way to measure quantity of energy transferred as heat. It relies on temperature as one of its primitive concepts, and used in calorimetry. It is presupposed that enough processes exist physically to allow measurement of differences in internal energies. Such processes are not restricted to adiabatic transfers of energy as work. They include calorimetry, which is the commonest practical way of finding internal energy differences. The needed temperature can be either empirical or absolute thermodynamic. In contrast, the Carathéodory way recounted just above does not use calorimetry or temperature in its primary definition of quantity of energy transferred as heat. The Carathéodory way regards calorimetry only as a secondary or indirect way of measuring quantity of energy transferred as heat. As recounted in more detail just above, the Carathéodory way regards quantity of energy transferred as heat in a process as primarily or directly defined as a residual quantity. It is calculated from the difference of the internal energies of the initial and final states of the system, and from the actual work done by the system during the process. That internal energy difference is supposed to have been measured in advance through processes of purely adiabatic transfer of energy as work, processes that take the system between the initial and final states. By the Carathéodory way it is presupposed as known from experiment that there actually physically exist enough such adiabatic processes, so that there need be no recourse to calorimetry for measurement of quantity of energy transferred as heat. This presupposition is essential but is explicitly labeled neither as a law of thermodynamics nor as an axiom of the Carathéodory way. In fact, the actual physical existence of such adiabatic processes is indeed mostly supposition, and those supposed processes have in most cases not been actually verified empirically to exist.
Planck (1926) Over the years, for example in his 1879 thesis, but particularly in 1926, Planck advocated regarding the generation of heat by rubbing as the most specific way to define heat. Planck criticised Carathéodory for not attending to this. Carathéodory was a mathematician who liked to think in terms of adiabatic processes, and perhaps found friction too tricky to think about, while Planck was a physicist. ==Heat transfer==