Comment on "A fallacious argument in the finite time thermodynamic conceptof endoreversibility" [J. Appl. Phys. 83, 4561 (1998)]

In his paper D. P. Sekulic [J. Appl. Phys. 83, 4561 (1998)] advances a numb er of arguments about finite-time thermodynamics which call for refutation as well as comment. It provides an opportunity to put into print a clarific ation of just what finite-time thermodynamics is, what it is not, and how i t is related to some of the other, parallel efforts in the treatment of irr eversible systems and their performance. The two major points of the presen t comment are (i) finite-time thermodynamics is a general theory independen t of the concept of endoreversibility, which was originally introduced only to generate simple examples, and (ii) the strict division between the syst em to be optimized and the given fixed surroundings is essential to a corre ct interpretation of the results. I will refrain from commenting on details in D. P. Sekulic [J. Appl. Phys. 83, 4561 (1998)] in order not to obscure these main points. (C) 2001 American Institute of Physics.