🚀 go-pugleaf

>From: smythw@alum01.its.rpi.edu (William Smythe)

>Am I the first one to notice that the post claims to violate the second law but
>really violates the first law instead or have I just forgotten most of what I 
>learned in thermo. If I remember correctly, it is the first law that states 
>that you need a hot and a cold pole to convert heat to work and which lays
>down the relationship for the ideal Carnot efficicency. The second law on the
>other hand deals with entropy and implies (among other things) that as bad as
>the first law was, you will almost certainly do worse. Generating work from
>heat without a cold resevoir does not primarily concern the second law. 

The first law of thermodynamics simply says that the change in heat
contained within a fixed volume of material is equal to the work done
on that fixed volume.  It says nothing about hot and cold.  The second
law on the other hand says that entropy dS = (del Q/T)_rev >= 0.  This
implies that heat flows from hot to cold, and is also the principal
the carnot cycle is based upon.  Also the second law of thermodynamics
does not prevent dS = 0, after all this is what happens in any
reversible process.

Ed Luke
lush@erc.msstate.edu

>Bill Smythe
>smythw@rpi.edu
--
Mail: segmentation violation -- core dumped