The logic conflict of the second law of thermodynamics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application and implications of the second law of thermodynamics, particularly in the context of independent systems. Participants explore the challenges of applying the law to systems influenced by external interactions, such as electrostatic and gravitational forces, and question the stability of such systems.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant argues that the second law of thermodynamics implies that entropy in an independent system should always increase, but challenges arise when considering systems like two cups of water with floating charges, which may not be truly independent due to their interactions.
  • Another participant suggests that the electrostatic interactions between the charges in the cups should be considered part of the system, indicating that these interactions could affect the entropy and stability of the systems.
  • Concerns are raised about the applicability of the second law in scenarios where long-distance interactions, such as gravitational forces between celestial bodies, cannot be neglected, potentially undermining the concept of independence in thermodynamic systems.
  • One participant critiques another for misunderstanding the second law and emphasizes the lack of experimental evidence for any violations of the law, asserting that theoretical challenges do not equate to logical conflicts.
  • There is mention of specific equations, such as the Poisson and Boltzmann equations, that are suggested as necessary for determining the stability of the systems in question, though their complexity is noted as a barrier to resolution.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of the second law of thermodynamics and its applicability to systems with interactions. There is no consensus on whether the law can be universally applied in the scenarios discussed, indicating ongoing disagreement.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the assumptions about system independence and the complexity of the equations involved, which may affect the conclusions drawn about the stability of the systems.

zbl1905
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
The logic conflict of the second law of thermodynamics

The description of the second law of thermodynamics is that the thermal activity of an independent system always make entropy increase and make it maximum(stable balance)
There is some requirement for the subject of the second law of thermodynamics, which is independent system. While for the following independent system, there are problems when the second law of thermodynamics is applied. There are two cups A and B of water on the table. There are many floating charges. The outside doesn’t have any effect on them. So overall they can be viewed as independent system. From the second law of thermodynamics, the system should have a stable balanced state. From part like A, It is affected by B’s charges. So it cannot be viewed as independent system. And it is a big question whether it has a stable state or not. The same applies to B. Same subject and different conclusions show that the theory has disadvantage when applied to such subject.
Whether the system has stable state or not, should be determined by physical equations which should includes heat and electricity.
1 Poisson Equation
2 Boltzmann Equation ρ=A*exp(qu/kT)
It is hard to solve the equations. They are not linear. From instinct, the probability of that they can be solved is very small.
It shows the second law of thermodynamics is only practical when there is not long-distance system. For example, there two internal combustion engines working in a classroom. The interaction between them is universal gravitation, which is too small and the effect of it can be negleted.
But the universal gravitation between celestial bodies cannot be negleted. It will also ruin the independence inside a system. Any galaxy is affected by other galaxies. So the second law of thermodynamics is not suitable anymore. Theory of heat death of cosmos is practically meaningless.
The above is obstacle of language and logic. The following two parts of discussion is on problems of calculation.
 
Science news on Phys.org
Just putting it in a more textual matter, Second Law Of Thermodynamics says that:

"When certain amount of heat is provided to the system , a part of it use to increase the internal energy and rest in doing work" and ofcourse at the end of it all the system becomes stable as you have put it.

In the case of two cups A and B , you first need to know whether the attraction between the charges will effect the entropy of the system because increase/decrease in entropy will lead to instability of the independent systems, whether the charges will attract/oppose each other with enough force such that the charges start moving?...In that case, the charges disturb the system and its entropy changes and thus the stability is effected.But the charges will only effect each other's systems before the equilibrium,in stead state the interaction ends and the system stabilizes and this is what should happen as per the second law.
I think in these cases we shouldnot take the electrostatic interactions and gravitational interactions as an alien to the system,these interactions are actually part of the system .Remember that even though the cups A and B can be taken independent systems , but due to charge interactions,which I feel are every small, i think it wouuld be better to take cups A and B together as one system.
 
zbl1905 said:
The logic conflict of the second law of thermodynamics

The description of the second law of thermodynamics is that the thermal activity of an independent system always make entropy increase and make it maximum(stable balance)
There is some requirement for the subject of the second law of thermodynamics, which is independent system. While for the following independent system, there are problems when the second law of thermodynamics is applied. There are two cups A and B of water on the table. There are many floating charges. The outside doesn’t have any effect on them. So overall they can be viewed as independent system. From the second law of thermodynamics, the system should have a stable balanced state. From part like A, It is affected by B’s charges. So it cannot be viewed as independent system. And it is a big question whether it has a stable state or not. The same applies to B. Same subject and different conclusions show that the theory has disadvantage when applied to such subject.
Whether the system has stable state or not, should be determined by physical equations which should includes heat and electricity.
1 Poisson Equation
2 Boltzmann Equation ρ=A*exp(qu/kT)
It is hard to solve the equations. They are not linear. From instinct, the probability of that they can be solved is very small.
It shows the second law of thermodynamics is only practical when there is not long-distance system. For example, there two internal combustion engines working in a classroom. The interaction between them is universal gravitation, which is too small and the effect of it can be negleted.
But the universal gravitation between celestial bodies cannot be negleted. It will also ruin the independence inside a system. Any galaxy is affected by other galaxies. So the second law of thermodynamics is not suitable anymore. Theory of heat death of cosmos is practically meaningless.
The above is obstacle of language and logic. The following two parts of discussion is on problems of calculation.

You have presented no logical conflict. All you have done is (i) used your misunderstanding of what the 2nd law is to draw up a faulty conclusion and (ii) misunderstood on what is meant by an "isolated system". This is practically the same set of faulty understanding that is used by ignorant creationists in trying to use physics to discredit evolution.

Just because something is "... hard to solve..." doesn't have anything to do with logical conflict. Your "instinct" can also be wrong. What is illogical is that you seem to have neglect the amazing ABNSENCE of any EXPERIMENTAL observation of the violation of the 2nd Law. Remember, this is still physics. It requires not only a consistent theory, but also verifying experiments. What you have described lack BOTH!

Please note per our guidelines that PF is not the place for you to practice your own personal theory. There are plenty of other forums on the 'net for you to do this. This thing is going into the TD section where it belongs.

Zz.
 
zbl1905 said:
The logic conflict of the second law of thermodynamics

The description of the second law of thermodynamics is that the thermal activity of an independent system always make entropy increase and make it maximum(stable balance)
There is some requirement for the subject of the second law of thermodynamics, which is independent system. While for the following independent system, there are problems when the second law of thermodynamics is applied. There are two cups A and B of water on the table. There are many floating charges. The outside doesn’t have any effect on them. So overall they can be viewed as independent system. From the second law of thermodynamics, the system should have a stable balanced state. From part like A, It is affected by B’s charges. So it cannot be viewed as independent system. And it is a big question whether it has a stable state or not. The same applies to B. Same subject and different conclusions show that the theory has disadvantage when applied to such subject.
Whether the system has stable state or not, should be determined by physical equations which should includes heat and electricity.
1 Poisson Equation
2 Boltzmann Equation ρ=A*exp(qu/kT)
It is hard to solve the equations. They are not linear. From instinct, the probability of that they can be solved is very small.
It shows the second law of thermodynamics is only practical when there is not long-distance system. For example, there two internal combustion engines working in a classroom. The interaction between them is universal gravitation, which is too small and the effect of it can be negleted.
But the universal gravitation between celestial bodies cannot be negleted. It will also ruin the independence inside a system. Any galaxy is affected by other galaxies. So the second law of thermodynamics is not suitable anymore. Theory of heat death of cosmos is practically meaningless.
The above is obstacle of language and logic. The following two parts of discussion is on problems of calculation.


"So the second law of thermodynamics is not suitable anymore."

You are rather wrong, thermodynamics is perfectly applicable to gravitatory situations. It is well-known field of science.

If you want see some references in the study of thermodynamics of systems with long-range correlations and gravitatory bodies can consult the references that i cite in CPS: physchem/0309002.

A improved version with more references will be available at

www.canonicalscience.com in few time

and you will can download it without problems.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K