A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Tragicomical Thermodynamics



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #1  
Old March 11th 17, 03:50 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Tragicomical Thermodynamics

Clifford Truesdell, The Tragicomical History of Thermodynamics, 1822-1854, p. 6: "Finally, I confess to a heartfelt hope - very slender but tough - that even some thermodynamicists of the old tribe will study this book, master the contents, and so share in my discovery: Thermodynamics need never have been the Dismal Swamp of Obscurity that from the first it was and that today in common instruction it is; in consequence, it need not so remain." [....] p. 333: "Clausius' verbal statement of the "Second Law" makes no sense, for "some other change connected therewith" introduces two new and unexplained concepts: "other change" and "connection" of changes. Neither of these finds any place in Clausius' formal structure. All that remains is a Mosaic prohibition. A century of philosophers and journalists have acclaimed this commandment; a century of mathematicians have shuddered and averted their eyes from the unclean." https://www.amazon.com/Tragicomical-.../dp/1461394465

Jos Uffink, Bluff your way in the Second Law of Thermodynamics: "I therefore argue for the view that the second law has nothing to do with the arrow of time. [...] Before one can claim that acquaintance with the Second Law is as indispensable to a cultural education as Macbeth or Hamlet, it should obviously be clear what this law states. This question is surprisingly difficult. The Second Law made its appearance in physics around 1850, but a half century later it was already surrounded by so much confusion that the British Association for the Advancement of Science decided to appoint a special committee with the task of providing clarity about the meaning of this law.. However, its final report (Bryan 1891) did not settle the issue. Half a century later, the physicist/philosopher Bridgman still complained that there are almost as many formulations of the second law as there have been discussions of it. And even today, the Second Law remains so obscure that it continues to attract new efforts at clarification." http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/313/1/engtot.pdf

From the above quotations one can easily understand why systems violating the second law of thermodynamics, despite being commonplace, are regarded as insane ideas, just as insane as the idea of extracting energy out of nothing (the epithet "perpetuum mobile of the second kind" suggests just that).

Pentcho Valev
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AGAINST THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 2 January 26th 16 12:14 AM
GETTING RID OF THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 2 June 22nd 13 10:25 AM
TRAGICOMICAL THERMODYNAMICS Tonico Astronomy Misc 0 March 12th 12 12:04 PM
THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 2 December 24th 10 12:47 AM
"Big Rip" has problems with Thermodynamics ! Morenga Science 9 August 20th 03 02:22 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.