🚀 go-pugleaf

The critic of dead science bumps into this:

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/
"At first sight, the Second Law is indeed relevant for this arrow. If
the entropy can only increase during a thermodynamical process, then
obviously, a reversal of this process is not possible. Many authors
believe this is a crucial feature, if not the very essence of the
Second Law. Planck, for example, claimed that, were it not for the
existence of irreversible processes, 'the entire edifice of the second
law would crumble [. . . ] and theoretical work would have to start
from the beginning.', and viewed entropy increase as a 'universal
measure of irreversibility'. A similar view is expressed by Sklar in
his recent book on the foundations of statistical mechanics: 'The
crucial fact needed to justify the introduction of [. . . ] a definite
entropy value is the irreversibility of physical processes.' (...)
However, this is only one of many problems awaiting a student of the
Second Law. There are also authors expressing the opposite viewpoint.
Bridgman writes: 'It is almost always emphasized that thermodynamics
is concerned with reversible processes and equilibrium states and that
it can have nothing to do with irreversible processes or systems out
of equilibrium . . .' It is not easy to square this view, - and the
fact that Bridgman presents it as prevailing among thermodynamicists -
with the idea that irreversibility is essential to the Second Law.
Indeed, one can find other authors maintaining that the Second Law has
little to do with irreversibility or the arrow of time; in particular
Ehrenfest-Afanassjewa, Landsberg and Jauch. For them, the conflict
between the irreversibility of thermodynamics and the reversible
character of the rest of physics is merely illusory, due to a careless
confusion of the meaning of terms."

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a909857880
"The Ideology of Relativity: The Case of the Clock Paradox" by Peter
Hayes
"There is, nonetheless, some divergence about how to resolve the clock
paradox amongst mainstream scientists and philosophers who address the
issue. The majority suggest that (a) the general theory is required to
resolve the paradox because like "Kritikus" they have deduced - quite
correctly - that it cannot be explained by the special theory.
However, a minority believe that (b) the paradox can be explained by
the special theory because they have deduced - again quite correctly -
that it is incredible to suppose that only the general theory can
explain a prediction ostensibly arising from the prior special theory.
Each deduction, considered in isolation, is allowable within the
mainstream; what is not permitted is to bring the two of them together
to conclude that (c) neither the special nor the general theory
explains time dilation."

So sooner or later the critic of dead science finds himself in the
position of Mr. Praline and abandons his "LINE OF INQUIRY":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6tQ0218

http://www.orangecow.org/pythonet/sketches/petshop1.htm
Owner: Oh yes, the, uh, the Norwegian Blue...What's,uh...What's wrong
with it?
Mr. Praline: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. 'E's dead,
that's what's wrong with it!
Owner: No, no, 'e's uh,...he's resting.
Mr. Praline: Look, matey, I know a dead parrot when I see one, and I'm
looking at one right now.
Owner: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'! Remarkable bird, the
Norwegian Blue, idn'it, ay? Beautiful plumage!
............................
Mr. Praline: Um...now look...now look, mate, I've definitely 'ad
enough of this. That parrot is definitely deceased, and when I
purchased it not 'alf an hour ago, you assured me that its total lack
of movement was due to it bein' tired and shagged out following a
prolonged squawk.
Owner: Well, he's...he's, ah...probably pining for the fjords.
Mr. Praline: PININ' for the FJORDS?!?!?!? What kind of talk is that?,
look, why did he fall flat on his back the moment I got 'im home?
Owner: The Norwegian Blue prefers keepin' on it's back! Remarkable
bird, id'nit, squire? Lovely plumage!
....................................
Mr. Praline: I'M NOT PREPARED TO PURSUE MY LINE OF INQUIRY ANY LONGER
AS I THINK THIS IS GETTING TOO SILLY!

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com