Talk:Carnot heat engine

message: Is the Carnot cycle real one that we can use it in making engine?
The diagram shows the Entropy/Temperature version of the Carnot cycle.  I think that most people would find the Pressure/Volume version more meaningful though.  -- Derek Ross |  Talk
: Fixed your comments, hope you don't mind. It did not make sense as it was stated in its original form. To answer your question, the Carnot Engine is not an actual device that you can build in your basement. Its a theoretical device which could only function in a complete vaccuum.Sunshine Warrior04 (talk) 06:05, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: i had no idea what this was referring to until i looked at Carnot cycle.  someone needs to fix this.  looks like a lot of duplication, etc.
Wait!  Carnot Cycle redirects here while Carnot cycle is a different article.  great job guys!  ;) --pfunk42 04:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've fixed the redirect. Thanks for pointing it out. Tom Harrison Talk 13:24, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equation 3? 

message: I really don't like the addition of the gas turbine diagram and plots.
* It gives the impression that the Carnot cycle is equivalent to a gas turbine engine.
* The diagram gives no explanation of how it relates to a Carnot cycle.
* The plots of efficiency are simple plots of 1-Th/Tc, and they take up a lot of room for such a simple equation.
*  This is an application, its not a demonstration of the Carnot cycle.
PAR 18:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gas Turbine addition 

message: Why does this page have surface integrals and line integrals before simpler equations relating to carnot efficiency? The article doesn't even explain that those integrals *are* surface integrals and line integrals - and it doesn't label its variables well. This page needs to work on its accessibility to non-experts. Fresheneesz 00:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equations - not well explained 

message: i've never heard of anyone actually using the cycle in a real engine-is this simply because of the large volume requirements, or the result of something else? 69.163.197.224 14:45, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: impracticality. notice that a lot of assumptions made about the cycle is impossible to achieve in practice. as stated in the intro of article, the cycle is reversible, i.e. it creates no entropy, i.e. it has perfect efficiency (for any given TH and TC). the Carnot cycle is something one aims to achieve. the closer to the Carnot cycle the better the engine, although one usually doesn't even come close. Mct mht 16:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Carnot cycle sure has a very good efficiency, but it needs an infinite amount of time in order for the system to give/receive energy isothermally. So that power output=0W.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eric DUMINIL (talk • contribs) 11:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  use? 

message: for instance, you can talk about the carnot cycle when calculating the energy savings
from rigging a fountain pump to the condensation outlet vent on your air conditioner and
squirting the condensate onto the radiator outside your house, just for instance mind you  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.190.202.56 (talk) 03:34, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  it's theory -- you use it rhetorically 

message: Shouldn't we have T-V or P-V diagrams too instead of just T-S diagrams to explain the cycle better? 220.227.165.210 (talk) 08:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually just P-V diagrams to calculate the work done. 220.227.165.210 (talk) 08:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Gah I'm confused 220.227.165.210 (talk) 08:47, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  T-V or P-V diagrams 

message: Wasn't it developed by Lazare Carnot??? 88.104.47.64 (talk) 13:04, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong Carnot

message: I came across this article just perusing Wikipedia, and I was struck by this name. Does anyone know who Gangbangin Gallagher is, as mentioned in the "Modern Diagram" section? Sounds like a Wikibomb.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.198.15 (talk) 02:12, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who is Gangbangin Gallagher? 

message: Hi, 
    
I tried to edit the section on real engines. Hopefully it is correct and makes things a little clearer. Please let me know of suggestions to improve this.
I was also wondering about editing the page on the Clausius Theorem, since that too doesn't seem well explained at all.
Thanks
Aritrop (talk) 22:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edited the part on real engines 

message: Substituted at 10:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Why do we have both this article, and a Carnot cycle article, talking about the same thing? Geoffrey.landis (talk) 14:53, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge? 

message: The caption to one of the diagrams has:
< The entropy of a real material changes with temperature >
No, it doesn't. Consider, for example, the isentropic compression (or expansion) of a gas.
86.130.154.59 (talk) 10:46, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nonsense 

message: Just saw  by User:Stepho-wrs, where he made the change from  -> to -> , as other type of engines exist. While that is true, I also wonder, isn't the Carnot engine the most efficient engine, full stop? I do believe it is, but it would be nice if someone else could confirm or deny. Thanks. AdrianHObradors (talk) 11:05, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The mathematics in the article are stated in terms of heat engines. Therefore, they can only prove proves things about heat engines. Therefore they can't say anything about non-heat engines. To say that Carnot engines are the most efficient of all possible types of engines requires a reliable reference to back it up. I might possibly be wrong about electrical engines being more efficient but it would still need a reference as soon as we talk about anything besides heat engines. When I do searches about the efficiency of Carnot engines from reliable sources, they always qualify it as the Carnot engine being the most efficient heat engine.  Stepho  talk  11:50, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi @Stepho-wrs! Yeah, I have been thinking about it and it is probably right to leave it as "heat engine". It probably gets too complicated anyway to measure efficiency with other engines. If we are talking about an electric motor, it is turning electricity to mechanical energy, but that electricity must have come from another engine. It is an interesting subject, I might bring it up on WP:RD/S. AdrianHObradors (talk) 12:36, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem.  Stepho  talk  12:47, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most efficient engine or most efficient heat engine?