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 Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 08:49 AM EDT
2nd law - in a closed system, entropy increases.
I concur.
Corollary - in an open system, the 2nd law does not apply.
Like some of the previous posters I am going to have to admit to it being a while since I studied thermodynamics. So take what follows with whatever amount of salt you wish, but I don't believe the second law ceases to function simply because a system is open. It just no longer prohibits a descrease in entropy for the system under consideration (and hence is not a valid argument against evolution).

I seem to recall that entropy inreasing in a closed system is but one of at least two equivalent formulations of the 2nd law. I also seem to remember that one of the consequences of the 2nd law has to do with it requiring an expenditure of energy to move heat against a thermal gradient. I.e. you can't get air conditioning for free. (I came up with a "brilliant" plan to do just that when I was in Jr. High. Would have worked as well as all other perpetual motion machines!)

My initial reaction, like somebody's above, was that this would violate the 2nd law. Perhaps more analysis is needed about whether the expenditure of energy is actually enough to satisfy the 2nd law. I do recall that finding the flaw in perpetual motion machines (which is what violation of either the 1st or 2nd law leads to) can be subtle.

A couple of other observations from my increasingly vague recollection:

-- The 2nd law as stated above is from classical thermodynamics and uses a defintion of entropy based on absolute temperature and energy transfer for a reversible process.

-- Statistical mechanics (aka statistical thermodynamics) uses a different definition of entropy, which can be viewed as a measure of randomness. Unlike classical thermodynamics, statistical mechanics does not forbid a decrease in entropy in a closed system. But for a system of any significant size (in terms of the number of particles) it is very unlikely. (As its name would suggest, statistical mechanics deals in probabilities as opposed the absolutes of classical thermodynamics.)

[ 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 )