decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Perhaps | 227 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Perhaps
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 03:51 PM EDT
If I remember my stuff from a Chemistry degree 40 years ago then Entropy is unrelated to the laws of Thermodynamics.

ISTR that Entropy always increased.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • Perhaps - Authored by: Wol on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 04:43 PM EDT
    • Perhaps - Authored by: jjs on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 06:15 PM EDT
      • Perhaps - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 08:49 AM EDT
As I recall the argument - (from about 1972)
Authored by: jesse on Wednesday, June 13 2012 @ 08:39 PM EDT
As I recall the argument - (from about 1972) it goes like this:

1. a diode only permits a current to flow in one direction

2. to implement a diode requires an energy gap such that the amount of energy
required to flow in one direction is less than the energy required to flow in
the other.

3. Given a small enough energy gap, then thermal excitation should cause
electrons to cross the gap, but not be able to return.

This turns the diode into a battery, with the result that the temperature of the
diode decreases.

This is effectively an implementation of Maxwells' daemon:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_demon

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )