If Universe reaches 0K to its end, the accumulated entropy on one way or an other will need to be 0 as it is said by the 3rd law of thermodynamics. True?
Comparison of New and Old Thermodynamics
1. Logic of the Second Law of Thermodynamics: Subjectivism, Logical Jump, Interdisciplinary Argumentation.
2. New thermodynamics pursues universality, two theoretical cornerstones:
2.1 Boltzmann formula: ro=A*exp(-Mgh/RT) - Isotope centrifugal separation experiments show that it is suitable for gases and liquids.
2.2. Hydrostatic equilibrium: applicable to gases and liquids.
3. The second and third sonic virial coefficients of R143a derived from the new thermodynamics are in agreement with the experimental results.
3.1. The third velocity Virial coefficient derived is in agreement with the experimental data, which shows that the theory is still correct when the critical density is reached.
4. See Appendix Pictures and Documents for details.
The so-called "entropy " doesn't exist at all.
During the process of deriving the so-called entropy, in fact, ΔQ/T can not be turned into dQ/T. That is, the so-called "entropy " doesn't exist at all.
The so-called entropy was such a concept that was derived by mistake in history.
It is well known that calculus has a definition,
any theory should follow the same principle of calculus; thermodynamics, of course, is no exception, for there's no other calculus at all, this is common sense.
Based on the definition of calculus, we know:
to the definite integral ∫T f(T)dQ, only when Q=F(T), ∫T f(T)dQ=∫T f(T)dF(T) is meaningful.
As long as Q is not a single-valued function of T, namely, Q=F( T, X, …), then,
∫T f(T)dQ=∫T f(T)dF(T, X, …) is meaningless.
1) Now, on the one hand, we all know that Q is not a single-valued function of T, this alone is enough to determine that the definite integral ∫T f(T)dQ=∫T 1/TdQ is meaningless.
2) On the other hand, In fact, Q=f(P, V, T), then
∫T 1/TdQ = ∫T 1/Tdf(T, V, P)= ∫T dF(T, V, P) is certainly meaningless. ( in ∫T , T is subscript ).
We know that dQ/T is used for the definite integral ∫T 1/TdQ, while ∫T 1/TdQ is meaningless, so, ΔQ/T can not be turned into dQ/T at all.
that is, the so-called "entropy " doesn't exist at all.
.
.
.
Why did the wrong "entropy" appear ?
In summary , this was due to the following two reasons:
1) Physically, people didn't know Q=f(P, V, T).
2) Mathematically, people didn't know AΔB couldn‘t become AdB directely .
If people knew any one of them, the mistake of entropy would not happen in history.
Please read my paper and those answers of the questions related to my paper in my Projects.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230554936_Entropy_A_concept_that_is_not_a_physical_quantity
Dear Gert Van der Zwan@
My problems has much to do with time arrow. If entropy is always increasing and is irreversible, then, how is it possible that a system that is tending to almost 0 K temperature (I will accept that 0k is only reachable in an infinitum time) should have a very little entropy? The particles accelerators use super-conductors that are at temperature as close to 0 k as possible in order to eliminate entropy. They are almost perfect crystals, aren't they? I am sure I am mixing things, am I?
Thanks for your kindness,
Arancha
Thanks Gert Van der Zwan
for your answer. I see you have the same question I do. Is it possible that the singularity that switched on our Big Bang was almost pure enthalpy? Something as "the accumulated entropy of the previous Universe is enthalpy in a parallel reality", accepting two realities coexisting that are cyclicly exchanging positions? The more the entropy grows in the regular matter side, the more enthalpy is accumulated in black holes till the black hole of black holes accumulates the total enthalpy. It's just a stupid thought but could open other more prepared minds... Frampton believes black holes have the entire black matter of universe. DOI: 10.1088/1475-7516/2009/10/016.Kind regards,
Arancha
Gert Van der Zwan
yes, I mean enthalpy. What if preassure remainded constant? Does it make any sense or explains something related to inflation? I do not know but when thinking on a cyclic universe I think about reversible reality, or about two coexisting realities that are interchangeable. Space is expanding and contracting at the same time and even time arrow seems to be reversible. I don't think on Universe’s space contraction or expansion at all, neither Universe’s future nor past. I think about local time and space emerging from two realities moving in opposite directions (not physical directions but "purposes"). When turning “our reality” purpose to observation we obtain space expanding and time travelling to future. Globally there is neither time nor space but if “riding” on one of the realities, space could expand, time could travel to future while, enthalpy decreases and entropy increases; if being part of the opposite reality we could observe its purpose, we could see everything going the other way around: space contracts, time travels to past, enthalpy increases and entropy decreases. The pre-big bang and the black holes are singularities where both realities are connected. I mean, only at the singularities both time and space are 0, entropy and enthalpy are maximum and interchangeable as matter is 0. They are the “places” (points?) in Universe where the two realities could be observed at the same time and space. Out of singularities the two realities share the Universe but are unable to connect; in other words they are unable to share any result or measurement of any magnitude. Quantic Mechanics is almost aware of that. Our big bang fixed well in this model as well as QM and GR. Universe is an hologram: time and three dimensional space are trapped in a flat Universe. Time and space exist only inside the hologram and behaves depending on the reality purpose where you observe it.
Gert Van der Zwan
it is a good point that of water but I might say this is a local observation. In general terms, what’s going on with the entropy and enthalpy of the observable Universe? If we trust in the measurements that bring cosmologists to award Big Freeze as the end of the Universe, we then must accept we lose enthalpy as we cool down while we gain entropy at the same time. What is your opinion on that?
Regarding evidences of my speculations, besides intuition emerging at the time I join the pieces of nowadays cosmological knowledges, these are in fact the evidences, if they can be called so, that support my idea. Dark matter, for instance, is a kind of matter that, not being proved at all, has been estimated in order to give sense to many equations. What if black matter is the matter of the parallel reality that is needed to make things happen in our reality and vice verse? It is not affected by electromagnetism but instead it is by gravity, that means, the space time curvature that makes matters, whatever it is, converge together. I recommend the following article from Frampton in which he uses entropy to deduct that all dark matter are black holes arXiv:0905.3632v4. I am looking forward your opinion if you have the time and the will to read it.
And what about the dark energy which has been found possible responsible for Universe’s expansion acceleration? It seems to me the anti-curvature of the space time that makes matter separate instead.
Many thanks for treating me seriously.
Arancha
Gert Van der Zwan
Have a look (althoug fine name is in Spanish, it's in English inside).
Gert Van der Zwan
(try adding water to alcohol keeping the volume constant), not because it has some basic significance. :-))))))
I don't mean enthalpy and entropy as forces, but it seems to me that this world looks for entropy with hunger while loses its energy, (or its enthalpy?). What will happen at the freeze-out time with enthalpy?
What if there is a collector that it is waiting to the right critical condition to revert the accumulated amount of entropy returning to the Universe its energy? Or the other way around, what if there is a reality that loses the entropy we gain and its waiting us to reach the critic limit to return it?
What if there are places in Universe where entropy goes backwards, as black holes singularities?
Gert Van der Zwan
I believed that too, but have a look to the following paper... File name is in Spanish but content is in pure English.
You may find more in here:
http://nicadd.niu.edu/~bterzic/PHYS652/index.htm
Regards,
Arancha
Proving the Existence of Perpetual motion machine with COMSOL
Miao Bo
ABSTRACT: In this paper, we study charged conductors. The charge density at the tip is high, and the charge concentration potential is high. In the depression, the charge density tends to be zero, and the concentration potential tends to be negative infinite. Using the difference of the concentration potential between the two, the diffusion channel is established at the tip and the depression. During the diffusion process, the heat energy of the charge is converted into electric energy. The charge enters the depression and returns to the tip by conduction.
Key words: Law 2 of thermodynamics, electrostatic equilibrium, COSMOL of long-range interaction
PACC: 4460, 5130
1， The second law of thermodynamics is incorrect. See figure below for details.
2，The system is isothermal and exchanges heat with a large heat source to keep the temperature constant. Only volume changes are discussed.
3，The problem here is that the actual system is balanced and the second law of thermodynamics judges it to be unbalanced.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Thermodynamics