Is the Second Law of Thermodynamics Falsifiable?

Thread starter madness
Start date Jul 29, 2020
Tags

Law Second law Thermodynamics

AI Thread Summary

The discussion centers on whether the Second Law of Thermodynamics is an empirical or mathematical law, questioning its falsifiability. Participants argue that while the law describes predictable outcomes based on observations, it does not imply absolute certainty, allowing for potential violations under specific conditions. The distinction between mathematical laws and empirical laws is emphasized, with the Second Law being classified as empirical due to its reliance on real-world observations. Examples are provided to illustrate how one could theoretically falsify the law, such as the existence of a perpetual motion machine. Ultimately, the conversation highlights the complexity of defining scientific laws and their applicability to reality.

Aug 5, 2020

#101

Dale

Mentor

Insights Author

madness said:

Also, it still seems to me that the only way we know there couldn't be intersubjective agreement by a community of speakers regarding the statement "I see a square with 3 sides", is that it is logically impossible.
So as far as I can see, my reasoning was correct.

Your reasoning is incorrect because the logical impossibility is not relevant, only the fact that there is no observation sentence is relevant. As I showed in post 93.

At this point this has become unproductive. This thread is closed again.