The change in capillary vapor pressure: The experiment is 10 to 30 times the second law of thermodynamics (Kelvin formula). Is the Second Law of Thermodynamics a pseudoscience?
Please refer to the pictures and literature links for details.
https://www.doc88.com/p-9049712811920.html
The Kelvin formula is an approximation that works better in some cases than others. The Second Law of Thermodynamics is a settled fact.
As a fundamental physical theory, theoretical predictions must fall within the experimental error range, otherwise the theory needs significant modification or negation. As for the deviation of 10 to 30 times, scientists are not taking it seriously, which makes people suspect.
The following improvement experiment can achieve heat transfer from low temperature to high temperature without consuming external energy. This experiment requires very conventional thermophysical properties to understand.
Article The dual gas Carnot cycle(dW=P1*dV1+P2*dV2=0) causes heat to...
All logically sound predictions of the 2LoT are correct, though some people may have made inferences that are lacking logical rigor and attribute them to the 2LoT. Such are failures of a particular person's logic, not a failure of the 2LoT. Simply saying that the 2LoT is more complicated than F=mA and thus potentially flawed is not sound reasoning. F=mA even when there is a seemingly chaotic explosion of particles and even when some of the mass is converted to energy. If a particular experiment doesn't show this, the experiment is flawed. We know this because every single time some diligent researcher has dug deep enough to verify these foundational principles, they have been confirmed--without exception. Another factor which may play into your example is the use of analytical derivatives, which presume an infinitely fine continuum, which is an approximation and not reality. Analytical calculus is not always accurate enough or entirely appropriate to handle every possible experiment. Again... when we can check it, the law holds, which should be adequate proof.
For complex systems, the first law of thermodynamics is very accurate and does not require explanation. And thermodynamics and experiments do not match, so there are arguments like this and that. In fact, basic science pursues the effect of the first law of thermodynamics. The second law of thermodynamics is not a fundamental science.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Materials Science
- Plating