Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The logic conflict of the second law of thermodynamics

  1. May 26, 2005 #1
    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 Boltzman 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.
  2. jcsd
  3. May 27, 2005 #2
    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.
  4. May 27, 2005 #3


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    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.

  5. May 27, 2005 #4

    "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: May 27, 2005
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: The logic conflict of the second law of thermodynamics