Article View: sci.physics.relativity
Article #497Re: CRUCIAL THEOREM IN THERMODYNAMICS
From: Pentcho Valev
Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 11:46
Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 11:46
109 lines
6647 bytes
6647 bytes
Originally, the second law of thermodynamics appeared in 1824 as the conclusion in an argument advanced by Carnot: Premise 1: Heat is an indestructible substance (cannot be converted into work in the heat engine). Premise 2: Perpetuum mobile of the first kind is impossible. Conclusion: All heat engines working reversibly between the same two temperatures have the same efficiency. Carnot's 1824 argument was valid but Premise 1 turned out to be false in the end (in fact, heat IS converted into work in the heat engine). The crucial question: How can a FALSE premise be indispensable in the deduction of a TRUE conclusion? has never been asked. (Those who would think that Premise 1 was not indispensable for Carnot's argument should try to deduce the conclusion from Premise 2 alone). Let me advance a hypothesis: If the crucial question had been both asked and answered, the following sad texts would never have been written: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2005/nov/22/schools.g2 "We are nearing the end of the "World Year of Physics", otherwise known as Einstein Year, as it is the centenary of his annus mirabilis in which he made three incredible breakthroughs, including special relativity. In fact, it was 100 years ago yesterday that he published the most famous equation in the history of physics: E=mc2. But instead of celebrating, physicists are in mourning after a report showed a dramatic decline in the number of pupils studying physics at school. The number taking A-level physics has dropped by 38% over the past 15 years, a catastrophic meltdown that is set to continue over the next few years. The report warns that a shortage of physics teachers and a lack of interest from pupils could mean the end of physics in state schools. Thereafter, physics would be restricted to only those students who could afford to go to posh schools. Britain was the home of Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday and Paul Dirac, and Brits made world- class contributions to understanding gravity, quantum physics and electromagnetism - and yet the British physicist is now facing extinction. But so what? Physicists are not as cuddly as pandas, so who cares if we disappear?" http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/may/22/highereducation.education Harry Kroto: "The wrecking of British science....The scientific method is based on what I prefer to call the inquiring mindset. It includes all areas of human thoughtful activity that categorically eschew "belief", the enemy of rationality. This mindset is a nebulous mixture of doubt, questioning, observation, experiment and, above all, curiosity, which small children possess in spades. I would argue that it is the most important, intrinsically human quality we possess, and it is responsible for the creation of the modern, enlightened portion of the world that some of us are fortunate to inhabit. Curiously, for the majority of our youth, the educational system magically causes this capacity to disappear by adolescence.....Do I think there is any hope for UK? I am really not sure." Pentcho Valev wrote: Kelvin's version of the second law of thermodynamics: It is impossible to perform a cyclic process with no other result than that heat is absorbed from a reservoir, and work is performed. THEOREM: Kelvin's version of the second law is true if and only if, whenever two INTERACTING heat engines absorb heat from a reservoir (the surroundings) and perform reversible work, the following equality of partial derivatives holds: (dF1 / dX2)_X1 = (dF2 / dX1)_X2 where "d" is the sign for partial derivative, F1 and F2 are work- producing forces and X1 and X2 are the respective displacements. If the two partial derivatives are not equal, the second law is false. Consider INTERACTING "chemical springs". There are two types of macroscopic contractile polymers which on acidification (decreasing the pH of the system) contract and can lift a weight: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jp972167t J. Phys. Chem. B, 1997, 101 (51), pp 11007 - 11028 Dan W. Urry, "Physical Chemistry of Biological Free Energy Transduction As Demonstrated by Elastic Protein-Based Polymers" Polymers designed by Urry (U) absorb protons on stretching (as their length, Lu, increases), whereas polymers designed by Katchalsky (K) release protons on stretching (as their length, Lk, increases). (See discussion on p. 11020 in Urry's paper). Let us assume that two macroscopic polymers, one of each type (U and K) are suspended in the same system. At constant temperature, if the second law is true, we must have (dFu / dLk)_Lu = (dFk / dLu)_Lk where Fu>0 and Fk>0 are work-producing forces of contraction. The values of the partial derivatives (dFu/dLk)_Lu and (dFk/dLu)_Lk can be assessed from experimental results reported on p. 11020 in Urry's paper. As K is being stretched (Lk increases), it releases protons, the pH decreases and, accordingly, Fu must increase. Therefore, (dFu/ dLk)_Lu is positive. In contrast, as U is being stretched (Lu increases), it absorbs protons, the pH increases and Fk must decrease. Therefore, (dFk/dLu)_Lk is negative. One partial derivative is positive, the other negative: this proves that the second law of thermodynamics is false. Pentcho Valev pvalev@yahoo.com
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<701a75dc-76ad-4347-b5ac-d20a926fda08@e2g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!e2g2000yqn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mailReferences:
<5b9a97b9-2d60-4eff-8e53-2711b336a968@d39g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> <pan.2010.05.06.20.12.25@canonicalscience.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 237b8ad48,c01e6ea42e445a92 X-Google-Attributes: gid237b8ad48,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!e2g2000yqn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,fr.sci.physique,fr.sci.astrophysique Subject: Re: CRUCIAL THEOREM IN THERMODYNAMICS Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 04:46:40 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 109 Message-ID: <701a75dc-76ad-4347-b5ac-d20a926fda08@e2g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> References: <5b9a97b9-2d60-4eff-8e53-2711b336a968@d39g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> <pan.2010.05.06.20.12.25@canonicalscience.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 84.54.163.41 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1273492000 8507 127.0.0.1 (10 May 2010 11:46:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 11:46:40 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: e2g2000yqn.googlegroups.com; posting-host=84.54.163.41; posting-account=Lz-LbgoAAABPDavKeW-eYeobwLHD_cvQ User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; AskTB5.5),gzip(gfe)