Second law of thermodynamics Puns

How does the effect of gravitational pull not break the second law of thermodynamics? Disordered clouds of dust or gas in space will come together into a planet or a star given enough time. How does this process not decrease the net amount of entropy? Where in this process is disorder increased to balance the decrease from the formation of a planet from dust?

Hello everyone,

Carnot efficiency (that is, the greatest possible efficiency of a heat engine) is equated to (tHigh-tLow)/(tHigh),

where tLow is the low temperature in this heat engine, and tHigh is the high temperature.

The second law of thermodynamics roughly states that entropy (disorganization) in a system cannot decrease.

Let's just imagine that I have this heat engine where the low temperature is approximately 0k (and I know that this temperature cannot be exactly reached), and my high temperature is something like 293.

Now, we know that in this circumstance, the Carnot efficiency will be close to 100%. And if I am not mistaken, the Carnot efficiency is the maximum rate of conversion between heat and some useful form of energy (eg. electrical/potential energy). Well, if my Carnot efficiency is near 100%, I would suppose that nearly 100% of that supplementary heat would be converted. I would expect that the final temperature of the system would eventual end up at something near 0k.

As we know, however, this would violate the second law of thermodynamics. If I charge some battery with this useful energy, and the final temperature of the system is 0k, I have decreased the entropy of the system.

Where am I mistaken?

Thanks and all response is very much appreciated,

Reece

I have been presented with the following question:

The coefficient of expansion for Water α is
α > 0 for T > 4°C
α = 0 for T = 4°C
α < 0 for T < 4°C

Why is it impossible to form a Carnot cycle with its two isothermals at 2°C and 6°C, which would violate the second law of thermodynamics by taking heat from both reservoirs and converting it to work?

I have calculated ∂Q = ∂V T α/κₜ on the isothermals, where ∂V and ∂Q are small changes in heat and volume respectively and κₜ is the coefficient of isothermal compression. Since κₜ is positive, this would mean below 4°C a decrease in volume would lead to an increase in internal heat. Above 4°C expansion would equally take up heat.
Because the 2 adiabats don't change heat, this process appears to indeed consume heat throughout the entire cycle, thus having to spit out all that energy as work.

Checking for general impossibilities in that cycle, I have noticed ∂T/∂V for the adiabats to flip sign through ∞, while plotting a V-T diagram of the cycle. This to me looks like the most promising problem, but I can't see how simply working with V(T) instead of T(V) wouldn't fix this. Infinite slope and reversal of sign in the V-T diagram should just be a local maximum in the T-V diagram after all, right?

Additionally I also noticed the relation ∂Q = ∂V T α/κₜ indicates isothermal expansion at 4°C would be adiabatic too. With this, one can construct plenty of abominations, like a carnot cycle with only one isothermal and 3 adiabats. iirc adiabats should never cross, in the same way an equation should never solve to 1=2.

So where is this impossible, what is my mistake here?

Today I saw the Legos again. My life gets chunked into bricks and the bricks build an infinite structure over and over, rotating 90 degrees in 4-space with each pulse. As new blocks twist into the field of view from above, the old trail off downward into a curve as they exit.

When we come across the idea of infinity in the everyday world, the asymmetry of time means that the two ends do not look the same. You could say that the gradient along the time axis is infinite in itself, but it is still a lopsided reality. Sure, the abstract ideas of symmetric infinities are comprehensible for us, but they require mathematical representation rather than observation.

However, this Lego process, as with many others in the hyperspace, appears completely isentropic. Bricks being used are the same as the bricks that have been used. While there are qualitative differences between certain bricks, the number of microstates never changes. They are simply cycling.

I'm starting to think that this is more significant than we realize. There is no way you can possibly feel an absence of entropy in any environment other than the DMT space. It's such a deep property of our universe that I don't think we're designed to be able to ignore it. Could this be a large part of what makes it so profound?

Some info on them. They do require some outright stimulation, but they don't drain any energy from it.

Like for many time travel theories, it is necessary for this fundamental law to be broken. Can it be done?

By the law, an isolated system will slowly fall apart. How were stars and planets able to form? Where did they get the outside resource to bypass the second law of thermodynamics? Assuming the universe is not itself an isolated system.

I'm confused on this topic of thermodynamics.

Applied to the light bulb, the second law of thermodynamics says that 100 units of electrical energy cannot be converted to 100 units of light energy. Instead, of the 100 units that are used to generate light, 95 are needed to heat the filament (thermal energy).

So it's 95% isn't?

https://www.uwsp.edu/cnr-ap/KEEP/nres633/PublishingImages/heatbulb.jpg

put in vibrators?

The second law of thermodynamics states that entropy can only remain the same or increase, it can never decrease. Everything tends to chaos. In Factorio terms I take this to mean everything descends to Spaghettification...

Let me explain...

Having launched my first rocket from a main bus..ish base, I decided to build a city block type design with each grid square making one product which is loaded on to a train to be taken to where it's needed.

So I designed a beaconed smelting plant (yeah I know a lot of people don't reckon it's worth beaconing smelters but that's another story). It outputs 8 blue lanes of iron plates

Initial Smelter design

I then figured rather running all of the iron to stations, I could just belt 4 lanes of it to another smelter to make steel. This results in 2 not quite full red belts of steel.

Iron to Steel smelter

Obviously I'm using the same smelter design for Copper too

Copper smelter

But if I'm belting iron to the steel smelter, why not belt some copper and steel in to a green chip plant?

Green chip plant

But then instead of just sending the greens to a station, I could send them and any left over copper to a red chip plant, with a station to bring in plastic...

Red chip plant

then as I've come this far I may as well ship in some sulphuric acid and belt the reds and any leftover greens to a blue chip plant.

Blue chip plant

So now I have a design for a complex of 8 grid squares that imports iron ore, copper ore, sulphuric acid, and plastic, and produces Iron, Steel, copper, Green, Red and Blue chips.

[Complete design](https://preview.redd.it/hzbfb5tthml61.png?width=1695&format=png&auto=webp&s=1e27b041bf32cd0e

Hi,

I am looking for a mathematical demonstration of thermodynamic's second principle. I guess I should look into thermostatistics, but I couldn't find a satisfying source.

Any help would be appreciated !

Thanks a lot.

As an engineer I like to think about stuff in a technical and reasonable way.

I observed (thanks for Reddit) that all bias about omnis seem to follow a law of physics. They are exactly the same everywhere. Most here are form the US, I'm form Germany and others are from all countries all over the world. But it's the same, lions, teeth, B12 deficit, you name it.

It really baffled me. Today my dad send me a picture of two dead and cooked fish he catched. He described how he emptied them from their guts and so on. I wrote that I don't want to know and see that. He was confused as he thought I would eat fish.

Like wtf? How does such a disease (to think that) spread around the world?

Anyway. My newest theory is that they follow the second law of thermodynamics. Maybe you hear about entropy. One way to imagine it is that things will always get more unordered, never the other way around (inside a closed system). And that's why every omni has the same thoughts.

So we, the vegans, are here to break the law. We have to order their brains again. They are at the worst state a system can be. There is too much entropy and zero empathy.

This means that every vegan is, in fact, a certified engineer. If you want a certificate, I will print you one.

Campbell Biology's description of a nonspontaneous reaction is:

>A process that, on its own, leads to a decrease in entropy.

But the second law of thermodynamics states that:

>Every energy transfer or transformation increases the entropy of the universe.

I am confused about these two statements. Upon every nonspontaneous reaction, the entropy should decrease, which seems like it contradicts the second law of thermodynamics.

My original "explanation" for this problem was that in a nonspontaneous reaction, the system's entropy decreases while the surrounding's entropy increases more than the decrease of the system, resulting in a net increase in the universe's entropy. But then I was blocked a second time while trying to explain the increase in the surrounding's entropy.

Not all reactions necessarily emit heat energy, right? For a nonspontaneous endothermic reaction, it seems that the increase in the surrounding's entropy cannot be explained by heat energy from the reaction. Then where does this extra entropy of the surrounding come from?

If you are still reading this, thank you for reading a long wrong post :D Can anyone clarify the differences? Thank you in advance :)

Source: https://www.compellingtruth.org/laws-of-thermodynamics.html

“[The third law of thermodynamics] is evidence for creationism on the basis of simple logic. If no natural process can create or destroy energy, then neither the universe nor the laws of physics can explain the existence of energy. In other words, if energy is impossible to create, why does it exist? The most reasonable explanation is something, or Someone, outside of the laws of physics, and outside of the universe.

The second law of thermodynamics involves a concept known as entropy, which is more or less a measure of chaos. In technical terms, the second law says that when two systems interact, they will always tend towards a greater total entropy as they reach a state of mutual thermodynamic equilibrium. In layman's terms, energy always flows from hot to cold. This means that the natural trend of all systems is to uniform states of energy, or increasing entropy, or disorder.

The second law of thermodynamics provides evidence for creationism in several ways, but is often misunderstood and therefore misapplied. As with the first law, the concept of entropy leads to some logical conclusions about the universe. If the universe was infinitely old, it would now be in a state of maximum entropy: of total chaos. All temperatures in the universe would be equalized, and there would be nothing but a formless fuzzy oblivion. Since this is not the current state of the universe, the universe must have a finite age, and therefore a beginning. This makes it reasonable to consider the universe an "effect," not a "cause," and therefore it requires something beyond it in order to begin.”

My question comes from this page - https://phys.org/news/2017-07-physicists-retrocausal-quantum-theory-future.amp

Specifically the sentence "It does not mean that signals can be communicated from the future to the past—such signaling would be forbidden even in a retrocausal theory due to thermodynamic reasons."

I have seen articles that suggest information could be sent back in time by quantum entangling particles (although I've also read articles that suggest quantum entanglement cannot be used for communication as changes to one entangled particle "breaks" the entanglement).

So my question is does retrocausality violate the second law of thermodynamics or does purely signalling violate it or neither?

So I've often heard that the second law only applies to isolated systems, but some people have also told me that this is a misconception and that it also applies to open systems as well. Does it apply to open systems?

Resistive heating is interesting: pass electricity through a resistor, and get heat.

But interestingly enough, the reverse is also sort of true: pass heat through a resistor, get electricity back out (albeit insanely garbled multidirectional current)

Why can't we rectify this noise, break the second law, and get electricity?

tl;dr: Omni brains are late stage universe with a high amount of entropy, making them confused and having zero empathy. We need to reduce their entropy!

As an engineer I like to think about stuff in a technical and reasonable way.

I observed (thanks for Reddit) that all bias about omnis seem to follow a law of physics. They are exactly the same everywhere. Most here are form the US, I'm form Germany and others are from all countries all over the world. But it's the same, lions, teeth, B12 deficit, you name it.

It really baffled me. Today my dad send me a picture of two dead and cooked fish he catched. He described how he emptied them from their guts and so on. I wrote that I don't want to know and see that. He was confused as he thought I would eat fish.

Like wtf? How does such a disease (to think that) spread around the world?

Anyway. My newest theory is that they follow the second law of thermodynamics. Maybe you hear about entropy. One way to imagine it is that things will always get more unordered, never the other way around (inside a closed system). And that's why every omni has the same thoughts.

So we, the vegans, are here to break the law. We have to order their brains again. They are at the worst state a system can be. There is too much entropy and zero empathy.

This means that every vegan is, in fact, a certified engineer. If you want a certificate, I will print you one.