Second Law of Thermodynamics Declared Wrong....

[SSDD]

In apparant paroxysms of warmist cult ecstacy one of our very own crop of warmists declared one of the fundamental laws of nature, the second law of thermodynamics to be excact wrong. He claimed that science has proven the second law of thermodynamics wrong 100 years gone now.

The exchange went like this....here

The second law of thermodynamics isn't a theory...it is a fundamental law of nature. Feel free to try and prove it wrong.

Quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics already did that. Around a hundred years ago.

So how about it all you warmers, and luke warmers out there...what do you say. Do you agree that the second law of thermodynamics has long since been proven wrong? Are any of you out there on that limb with our little warmist buddy? Do you believe one of the fundamental laws of nature has been overturned...wrong...pointless? Do you believe that proof actually exists to support our little warmist buddy's statement?

 

[editec]

Quote: Originally Posted by me
The second law of thermodynamics isn't a theory...it is a fundamental law of nature. Feel free to try and prove it wrong.
Quote: Originally Posted by our little warmist
Quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics already did that. Around a hundred years ago.

So now DO we call it the SECOND STRONGLY RECOMMENDED BEHAVIOR OF THERODYNAMICS?

 

[Sunshine]

Entropy requires no maintenance.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The AGW computer models totally contradict the Second Suggestion of Thermodynamics

 

[editec]

Entropy requires no maintenance.

Don't get too broken up about entropy.

Lose no sleep over the fact that it never rests, either.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzoPtNa5c3c]Everything Put Together Falls Apart - Paul Simon (original) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[SSDD]

So now DO we call it the SECOND STRONGLY RECOMMENDED BEHAVIOR OF THERODYNAMICS?

I was thinking maybe the second rule of thumb of thermodynamics bur the second strongly recommended behavior of thermodynamics is good also.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The AGW computer models totally contradict the Second Suggestion of Thermodynamics

The Second Suggestion of Thermodynamics.

 

[Old Rocks]

In apparant paroxysms of warmist cult ecstacy one of our very own crop of warmists declared one of the fundamental laws of nature, the second law of thermodynamics to be excact wrong. He claimed that science has proven the second law of thermodynamics wrong 100 years gone now.

The exchange went like this....here

The second law of thermodynamics isn't a theory...it is a fundamental law of nature. Feel free to try and prove it wrong.

Quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics already did that. Around a hundred years ago.

So how about it all you warmers, and luke warmers out there...what do you say. Do you agree that the second law of thermodynamics has long since been proven wrong? Are any of you out there on that limb with our little warmist buddy? Do you believe one of the fundamental laws of nature has been overturned...wrong...pointless? Do you believe that proof actually exists to support our little warmist buddy's statement?

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object. This precludes a perfect refrigerator. The statements about refrigerators apply to air conditioners and heat pumps, which embody the same principles.

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is impossible to extract an amount of heat QH from a hot reservoir and use it all to do work W . Some amount of heat QC must be exhausted to a cold reservoir. This precludes a perfect heat engine.

This is sometimes called the "first form" of the second law, and is referred to as the Kelvin-Planck statement of the second law.

Second Law: Entropy
Second Law of Thermodynamics: In any cyclic process the entropy will either increase or remain the same.

Entropy: a state variable whose change is defined for a reversible process at T where Q is the heat absorbed.
Entropy: a measure of the amount of energy which is unavailable to do work.
Entropy: a measure of the disorder of a system.
Entropy: a measure of the multiplicity of a system.

Since entropy gives information about the evolution of an isolated system with time, it is said to give us the direction of "time's arrow" . If snapshots of a system at two different times shows one state which is more disordered, then it could be implied that this state came later in time. For an isolated system, the natural course of events takes the system to a more disordered (higher entropy) state.

OK, flapyap, these statements are revelent to GHG warming of the atmosphere in what manner?

 

[Old Rocks]

Very interesting to see those that think their grasp of science is so much better than that of working scientists displaying the depths of their ignorance.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Very interesting to see those that think their grasp of science is so much better than that of working scientists displaying the depths of their ignorance.

Command of the English language helps with credibility when talking about more indepth subjects beyond 5-6 grade.

 

[jon_berzerk]

in apparant paroxysms of warmist cult ecstacy one of our very own crop of warmists declared one of the fundamental laws of nature, the second law of thermodynamics to be excact wrong. He claimed that science has proven the second law of thermodynamics wrong 100 years gone now.

The exchange went like this....here

the second law of thermodynamics isn't a theory...it is a fundamental law of nature. Feel free to try and prove it wrong.

quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics already did that. Around a hundred years ago.

so how about it all you warmers, and luke warmers out there...what do you say. Do you agree that the second law of thermodynamics has long since been proven wrong? Are any of you out there on that limb with our little warmist buddy? Do you believe one of the fundamental laws of nature has been overturned...wrong...pointless? Do you believe that proof actually exists to support our little warmist buddy's statement?

--lol

 

[IanC]

In apparant paroxysms of warmist cult ecstacy one of our very own crop of warmists declared one of the fundamental laws of nature, the second law of thermodynamics to be excact wrong. He claimed that science has proven the second law of thermodynamics wrong 100 years gone now.

The exchange went like this....here

The second law of thermodynamics isn't a theory...it is a fundamental law of nature. Feel free to try and prove it wrong.

Quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics already did that. Around a hundred years ago.

So how about it all you warmers, and luke warmers out there...what do you say. Do you agree that the second law of thermodynamics has long since been proven wrong? Are any of you out there on that limb with our little warmist buddy? Do you believe one of the fundamental laws of nature has been overturned...wrong...pointless? Do you believe that proof actually exists to support our little warmist buddy's statement?

your OP is a little misleading because you are taking the quote out of context.

he said the SLoT was correct for macro systems. he then said that quantum theory showed that the SLoT was insufficient to describe micro exchanges at the atomic level, and therefore the SLoT was wrong in the same way as Newton's Laws were wrong when Einstein described relativity.

the road to quantum theory was started by research into thermodynamics. without a 'granularity factor', Planck's constant, thermodynamics leads to absurd results.



edit- statistical mechanics also proves that the SLoT is not required, but is so likely to happen in any system that it is taken for granted that it is true.

 

[SSDD]

he said the SLoT was correct for macro systems. he then said that quantum theory showed that the SLoT was insufficient to describe micro exchanges at the atomic level, and therefore the SLoT was wrong in the same way as Newton's Laws were wrong when Einstein described relativity.

The second law is a law of nature, not a law of systems.

So are you saying that you believe the second law has been proven wrong for over a hundred years also?

And quantum theory has shown no such thing. Quantum theory is still theory with little if any actual proof in support at this time and the likelyhood of producing any proof that the second law is wrong standing at about zero.

 

[IanC]

he said the SLoT was correct for macro systems. he then said that quantum theory showed that the SLoT was insufficient to describe micro exchanges at the atomic level, and therefore the SLoT was wrong in the same way as Newton's Laws were wrong when Einstein described relativity.

The second law is a law of nature, not a law of systems.

So are you saying that you believe the second law has been proven wrong for over a hundred years also?

And quantum theory has shown no such thing. Quantum theory is still theory with little if any actual proof in support at this time and the likelyhood of producing any proof that the second law is wrong standing at about zero.

the SLoT is simply a description of what happens in nature. the actual physical processes that cause it are varied and encompass different areas.

 

[SSDD]

OK, flapyap, these statements are revelent to GHG warming of the atmosphere in what manner?

That backradiation, the foundation of climate hysteria and the backbone of the AGW hypothesis....is not possible. Energy in the atmosphere is in a state of higher entropy than energy in the surface of the earth....radiation from the atmosphere being absorbed by the surface of the earth would be returning to a state of lower entropy...not possible....

Now I suppose you are going to say that climate science makes no such claims associated with the greenhouse effect, but I am afraid that you will just be wrong.

From the IPCC's own public documents HERE

To balance the absorbed incoming energy, the Earth must, on average, radiate the same amount of energy back to space. Because the Earth is much colder than the Sun, it radiates at much longer wavelengths, primarily in the infrared part of the spectrum (see Figure 1). Much of this thermal radiation emitted by the land and ocean is absorbed by the atmosphere, including clouds, and reradiated back to Earth. This is called the greenhouse effect.

And trenberth's energy budget...the basis for all present climate modelling clearly shows energy from the atmosphere being backradiated and absorbed by the surface of the earth.

 

[SSDD]

the SLoT is simply a description of what happens in nature. the actual physical processes that cause it are varied and encompass different areas.

Nature? You mean like the real world as opposed to what happens in computer models?

Why not simply answer the question...it is an easy one and only requires a yes or no.

Do you believe the second law of thermodynamics has been proven wrong?

 

[IanC]

the SLoT is simply a description of what happens in nature. the actual physical processes that cause it are varied and encompass different areas.

Nature? You mean like the real world as opposed to what happens in computer models?

Why not simply answer the question...it is an easy one and only requires a yes or no.

Do you believe the second law of thermodynamics has been proven wrong?

I believe we have a more nuanced understanding of the SLoT now that we have investigated the actual atomic scale interactions. the arrow of time has a much stronger effect on the macro scale than the micro scale

 

[SSDD]

I believe we have a more nuanced understanding of the SLoT now that we have investigated the actual atomic scale interactions. the arrow of time has a much stronger effect on the macro scale than the micro scale

It is a yes or no question...Do you belive that the second law of thermodynamics is, in fact, wrong? If you believe it...then say it.

The mental gyrations you are doing in an attempt to not answer the question directly is in and of itself an answer.

 

[IanC]

I believe we have a more nuanced understanding of the SLoT now that we have investigated the actual atomic scale interactions. the arrow of time has a much stronger effect on the macro scale than the micro scale

It is a yes or no question...Do you belive that the second law of thermodynamics is, in fact, wrong? If you believe it...then say it.

The mental gyrations you are doing in an attempt to not answer the question directly is in and of itself an answer.

not at all. your description of the SLoT as an actual force of nature that allows or denies radiation by sequestered information is false.

the probability that it is true for macro systems is so high that that it beggars believe that you could find an example where it was not found to be true. but it is not absolutely true will no possibilty of falsification.

 

[Truthmatters]

Maxwell's demon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia