|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
FALSE PREMISES AND INVALID ARGUMENTS
In 1850 Clausius deduced (the prototype of) the second law of
thermodynamics in this way: http://web.lemoyne.edu/~giunta/Clausius.html "Ueber die bewegende Kraft der Warme" 1850 Rudolf Clausius: "Carnot assumed, as has already been mentioned, that the equivalent of the work done by heat is found in the mere transfer of heat from a hotter to a colder body, while the quantity of heat remains undiminished. The latter part of this assumption--namely, that the quantity of heat remains undiminished--contradicts our former principle, and must therefore be rejected... (...) It is this maximum of work which must be compared with the heat transferred. When this is done it appears that there is in fact ground for asserting, with Carnot, that it depends only on the quantity of the heat transferred and on the temperatures t and tau of the two bodies A and B, but not on the nature of the substance by means of which the work is done. (...) If we now suppose that there are two substances of which the one can produce more work than the other by the transfer of a given amount of heat, or, what comes to the same thing, needs to transfer less heat from A to B to produce a given quantity of work, we may use these two substances alternately by producing work with one of them in the above process. At the end of the operations both bodies are in their original condition; further, the work produced will have exactly counterbalanced the work done, and therefore, by our former principle, the quantity of heat can have neither increased nor diminished. The only change will occur in the distribution of the heat, since more heat will be transferred from B to A than from A to B, and so on the whole heat will be transferred from B to A. By repeating these two processes alternately it would be possible, without any expenditure of force or any other change, to transfer as much heat as we please from a cold to a hot body, and this is not in accord with the other relations of heat, since it always shows a tendency to equalize temperature differences and therefore to pass from hotter to colder bodies." I have always been claiming that Clausius' premises are true but the argument is INVALID. Here are the premises: 1. (TRUE) In the absence of irreversible changes in the surroundings influencing the process, heat always flows from hot to cold. 2. (TRUE) Perpetuum mobile of the first kind is impossible. In fact, there is a third FALSE premise used by Clausius which, if explicitly added to the set of premises, makes the argument VALID: 3. (FALSE) The process Clausius considers occurs in the absence of irreversible changes in the surroundings influencing it. In physical sciences, invalidity of arguments can be interpreted in terms of falsehood of premises. Pentcho Valev |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Things for sale on eBay, some very rare - if the response is Invalid Item, please contact me | [email protected] | Space Shuttle | 0 | April 21st 06 03:29 PM |
Things for sale on eBay, some very rare - if the response is Invalid Item, please contact me | [email protected] | Policy | 0 | April 21st 06 03:19 PM |
Things for sale on eBay, some very rare - if the response is Invalid Item, please contact me | [email protected] | History | 0 | April 21st 06 03:05 PM |
Things for sale on eBay, some very rare - if the response is Invalid Item, please contact me | [email protected] | History | 0 | April 21st 06 02:54 PM |
telescope arguments | mikeS | Amateur Astronomy | 12 | February 17th 04 03:16 AM |