In section 20.5 on page 547 the second sentence says:
ΔE = W + Q (20.1)
Remember that this law is a direct consequence of conservation of energy
That's not right. It would be better to say that equation 20.1 is a consequence of conservation of energy plus a boatload of assumptions ... non-obvious and unexplained assumptions.
Similarly in section 9.5 on page 213 in connection with equation 9.1 i.e. ΔE = W it says this equation
embodies conservation of energy
which is even more obviously not right. I am quite aware that many textbooks enshrine ΔE = W + Q (or something worse) as "the" first law of thermodynamics. It's a common misconception, but that doesn't make it any less of a misconception.
On page VII the book promises a "deductive" approach. I'm not sure a fully deductive approach is possible or even desirable, as mentioned in item #187 and discussed more fully at https://www.av8n.com/physics/meaning.htm
Be that as it may, if there is to be any semblance of deduction or even comprehension, it is important to clarify which equations are true in general and which are brutally stripped-down special cases.
Suggestions:
Either:
Clarify the brutal restrictions that lie behind equations 9.1 and 20.1 ... or
Get rid of those equations (and the underlying concepts) entirely. Focus attention on energy and entropy (rather than on «heat» and «work»).
In section 20.5 on page 547 the second sentence says:
That's not right. It would be better to say that equation 20.1 is a consequence of conservation of energy plus a boatload of assumptions ... non-obvious and unexplained assumptions.
Similarly in section 9.5 on page 213 in connection with equation 9.1 i.e. ΔE = W it says this equation
which is even more obviously not right. I am quite aware that many textbooks enshrine ΔE = W + Q (or something worse) as "the" first law of thermodynamics. It's a common misconception, but that doesn't make it any less of a misconception.
On page VII the book promises a "deductive" approach. I'm not sure a fully deductive approach is possible or even desirable, as mentioned in item #187 and discussed more fully at https://www.av8n.com/physics/meaning.htm Be that as it may, if there is to be any semblance of deduction or even comprehension, it is important to clarify which equations are true in general and which are brutally stripped-down special cases.
Suggestions: