|
|
On Feb 15, 12:56 pm, Pentcho Valev <pva...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Feb 15, 12:33 pm, Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > On 2008-02-15 10:59:51 +0100, Pentcho Valev <pva...@xxxxxxxxx> said:
>
> > [ a load of his usual stuff illustrating his hatred of thermodynamics,
> > exceeded only by his hatred of relativity. If anyone is interested, he
> > thinks that perpetual motion is possible (but he has yet to build the
> > machine that would make him the richest man in Bulgaria), i.e. he
> > rejects the conclusioon from the 2nd law of thermodynamics, and he
> > thinks that Einstein was a fraud. ]
>
> > Oh dear; now I've really wakened someone I thought I'd heard the last
> > of (not on this news group, but on others that deal with chemistry and
> > physics). Maybe Jan is right, but telling people what they should or
> > should not post is usually wasted effort. As most of us here, I'll post
> > what I please. If it activates the trolls that's a pity, but they'll
> > come anyway.
> > --
> > athel
>
> Cornish Cornish why the anger? After all, you are learning: you did
> not know systems at equilibrium do maximum work and now you know it.
> As for the second law Cornish Cornish, there are people much more
> dangerous than me. For instance, Jos Uffink, officially the greatest
> living expert in the foundations of thermodynamics, and Ehrenfest-
> Afanassjewa (do you know her?), say the second law (version: "entropy
> always increases") is just a red herring! A RED HERRING, Cornish
> Cornish:
>
> http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/
> Jos Uffink: "This summary leads to the question whether it is fruitful
> to see irreversibility or time-asymmetry as the essence of the second
> law. Is it not more straightforward, in view of the unargued
> statements of Kelvin, the bold claims of Clausius and the strained
> attempts of Planck, to give up this idea? I believe that Ehrenfest-
> Afanassjewa was right in her verdict that the discussion about the
> arrow of time as expressed in the second law of the thermodynamics is
> actually a RED HERRING."
Cornish Cornish I have just discovered a hypocrite that is much more
dangerous for thermodynamics than Jos Uffink, Ehrenfest-Afanassjewa
and me:
http://www.beilstein-institut.de/bozen2004/proceedings/CornishBowden/CornishBowden.htm
ATHEL CORNISH-BOWDEN: "The concept of entropy was introduced to
thermodynamics by Clausius, who deliberately chose an obscure term for
it, wanting a word based on Greek roots that would sound similar to
"energy". In this way he hoped to have a word that would mean the same
to everyone regardless of their language, and, as Cooper [2] remarked,
he succeeded in this way in finding a word that meant the same to
everyone: nothing. From the beginning it proved a very difficult
concept for other thermodynamicists, even including such accomplished
mathematicians as Kelvin and Maxwell; Kelvin, indeed, despite his own
major contributions to the subject, never appreciated the idea of
entropy [3]. The difficulties that Clausius created have continued to
the present day, with the result that a fundamental idea that is
absolutely necessary for understanding the theory of chemical
equilibria continues to give trouble, not only to students but also to
scientists who need the concept for their work."
No shame Cornish Cornish? Perhaps you should not have ruined my life:
http://bip.cnrs-mrs.fr/bip10/valevfaq.htm
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@xxxxxxxxx
|
|