On 1/11/22 1:38 PM, Pentcho Valev wrote:
A 200 years old fraud on which the whole of thermodynamics is predicated:
"A NECESSARY component of a heat engine...is that two temperatures are involved" http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/py105/Heatengines.html
"Two temperatures" are by no means "necessary". Isothermal (one-temperature) heat engines are commonplace - e.g. pH-sensitive polymers can do work, at the expense of ambient heat, as they swell or contract. No "two temperatures" involved:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Paul-Topham/publication/47426820/figure/fig1/AS:307404580376582@1450302371395/Illustration-of-a-volume-transition-in-a-cross-linked-polybase-network-triggered-by-a-pH.png
By adding and removing hydrogen ions (H+) one can cyclically extract work from pH-sensitive polymers - see Fig. 4 on p. 15 here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1367611/pdf/biophysj00645-0017.pdf
Addingnd removing H+, per se, consumes no work if done QUASISTATICALLY. This means that the work lost e.g. in adding is compensated by the work gained in removing, and the net work involved is zero. So lifting weights is the net work in the whole
process. The second law of thermodynamics is clearly violated.
See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
Pentcho Valev
Well, if you are talking statistical thermodynamics and information
entropy, and not necessarily the dynamics of heat flow, what is
the likelihood of an array of atoms or molecules doing something
unlikely if you have 6.02 times 10^23 or the like in a flask that
you are working with?
The probability is extremely unlikely.
However what if you are only working with say two atoms?
If two atoms are bouncing around in a flask. What are the odds
at any one time that both atoms will be in one specific half
area of the flask rather than the other one? Well, the odds
that the entropy will spontaneously reduce based upon statistics
alone with respect to a specific chosen side of the flask is
as great as one in four. Other states are one atom in each
side (on an atom by atom basis 50% likely) and both on the
opposite side (the other normalized 25%).
There are however no great forces or physical laws that prevent
the atoms from all randomly bouncing to one side of the flask at
any point in time however based upon the statistical formulation
of the system.
Rather, spontaneous entropy decreases become less and less likely
if you are choosing a system with a vast number of statistical
entities. (Like the statistical distribution of speeds in a
flask with a mole of atoms rather than just two or three atoms.)
If a 'law' can be violated, it is just statistically unlikely
that it will be violated, does it still remain a 'LAW' even if
its violation is 'VERY UNLIKELY' but not completely impossible?
Maybe that is a 'philosophic' question (whatever that means).
The likelihood of monkeys pounding typewriters at random to
produce the works of William Shakespeare or a leaf spontaneously
jumping up to the height of a tree limb due to a random alignment
of the atoms due to something like Brownian motion is among some
of those incredible numbers expressed and computed with logarithms.
Next question. Is someone 'irresponsible' if they do not have
insurance? Is someone 'irresponsible' if they do have insurance?
How 'stupid' is buying a lottery ticket if you are only paying a
small amount of money for it anyway? How 'likely' is a good
or bad occurrence? Is something or someone 'honest' or 'dishonest'
if this possible occurrence does or does not actually happen?
Well, ... who knows.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
