Peter Atkins - Four Laws That Drive the Universe

If you thought that you could never be interested in thermodynamics give this superb book a go. Like entropy your knowledge and enjoyment will start to increase.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Peter
• Atkings
• Four
• Laws
• That
• Drive
• the
• Universe
• Meet
• Author
• thermodynamics

[dopeasfuckk]

from the description i can tell 2007MTA never read the book.. second sentence doesn't even make sense. like a principle of thermodynamics my knowledge and enjoyment will start to increase?

[dopeasfuckk]

@pinball281 you beg the question by asking who.. and are creating a bigger problem to solve if you think complexity requires a more complex designer

[pinball281]

yeah i find this stuff very interesting but im more interested in who is the law giver?

[AxtoxthexJ]

yup who founded these laws who putted them in existence ?

[aluddite1]

<3 thermodynamics. especially sitzfleishing (sp?) over entropy. and his quote, 'if you don't know the second law... not properly educated' is 'true.' I'm just sayin'.

[cojonesdelperro]

@Twicebakedtaters For the nth time, "dispersed" is not the same thing as "ceased to exist". I am merely rephrasing the Clausius statement in plain language. If you think you can sidestep Clausius, then once again please tell me how you would do this, and with what you would replace the entropy column on steam tables. You seem unwilling to go beyond the First Law. BTW, no one has disputed "bodies at rest" for centuries. It's like saying the Earth isn't flat.

[Twicebakedtaters]

@cojonesdelperro Of course its not the same energy.

What do you mean once it is dispersed you don't get it back? Your thinking in finite terms. It goes on to affect countless things around it and does not cease to exist. That's like the myth that bodies are at rest.  Nothing in the universe is at rest. With respect to relativity things in the same relative frame of reference in space time can appear at rest with respect to each other.

[cojonesdelperro]

@Twicebakedtaters OK, call it "other energy" then (I won't argue over semantics), but it is not the same as the energy which has dispersed, and that is the point. Once it has dispersed, you don't get it back -- although I invite you to demonstrate how if you disagree. And you cannot just decree closed systems or entropy out of existence, you need to come up with a workable alternative which can, say, analyse a steam cycle just as well.

[Twicebakedtaters]

@cojonesdelperro Who ever suggested spontaneity? and you don't convert more energy......just other energy.

You are thinking in terms of closed systems and in reality there is no such animal. All things interact constantly.

and in a constant state of change. THAT is the irreversible process.

[cojonesdelperro]

@Twicebakedtaters Note I said it would not heat up again "spontaneously". Of course you can reheat, but to do that you need to convert more energy; you cannot re-use the heat which has already been dispersed or, as you say, absorbed by other systems (I did not say "disappeared"). That is an irreversable process, or where do you suppose the energy for the re-heat comes from?