Dissecting the 2nd Law Challenges

"Second Law challenges and violations" Google Alerts regarding media frenzy-like articles are on the rise, like "Argonne researchers posit way to locally circumvent Second Law of Thermodynamics", in: Argonne * Phys.org * Futurism * Cosmos * Inverse * Popular Mech...etc.(email)* However!(*).I am working on a manuscript with a hope to reason and prove that it is physically not possible to violate the 2nd Law. I am challenging and would appreciate clarifications by relevant authors if they (and their collaborators) believe in a possibility of the 2nd Law violations or there might be some loopholes in definitions and criteria for such violations, thus resulting in misleading conclusions?Thermodynamic “phenomenological” approach, is formulated on empirical, observable and logical, but universal principles that deny the possibility of various kinds of perpetual motions, while at the same time avoids speculative assumptions about the microscopic constitution and complex dynamics of the involved material systems. The physical systems are regarded as “black boxes” and all specific Thermodynamic quantities and their general properties are derived by means of these principal laws. That why the phenomenological Laws of Thermodynamics have much wider, including philosophical significance and implication, than their simple expressions based on the experimental observations – they are The Fundamental Laws of Nature.

CLICK on Images to Enlarge ....

Below is a List with Web links (in progress) of Professor Kostic's critical Comments and Assays related to selected publications by different authors and some related Assays to emphasize essence and universality of the Second Law of Thermodynamics (2nd Law) often elusive and misrepresented or challenged by some.

There is a 'strange propensity' of some authors involved with simplified statistical interpretation of complex, random-like natural phenomena, to make unjustified statements that their analyses are true descriptions of natural phenomena and that the phenomenological definitions are deficient and misleading, or even worse, that the natural phenomena are a subset of more general statistical theory, for example, that information entropy is more general than thermodynamic entropy, the latter being a subset of the former. For example, some “promoters” of statistical descriptions of entropy become so detached from physical reality as if not aware of the reality.

Every research and scholarly writing should be based on facts and objective observation and reasoning, and it should be correlated (or put in perspective) with existing knowledge. Therefore, along with outcome merit, the limitations, shortcomings and unresolved issues should be objectively and responsibly presented. The simplified simulations (analytical, statistical, numerical, etc.) should not take precedence over phenomenological reality and reliable observations, but to the contrary. Extreme judgments based on simulations are usually risky, particularly if detached from reality checks or with attempt to suppress reality. Etc... Scientists peek inside the mind of Maxwell's demon

Quantum Physics And Thermodynamics: Explaining The Thermodynamic Laws At Atomic And Subatomic Levels .. Science World Report

Now, the question that prevails is whether the same thermodynamic laws ... The second law states that the total entropy of isolated systems can only ...

Davide Castelvecchi recently has an article published in Nature regarding on the same topic.

These issues were discussed at the Fifth Quantum Thermodynamics Conference that was recently held in Oxford, U.K.

"Viewpoint: Maxwell's Demon Meets Nonequilibrium Quantum Thermodynamics

A new implementation of a Maxwell’s demon can control entropy production in a quantum-mechanical system that is driven out of thermal equilibrium: " Experimental Rectification of Entropy Production by Maxwell’s Demon in a Quantum System [Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 240502 (2016)]. Abstract: Maxwell’s demon explores the role of information in physical processes. Employing information about microscopic degrees of freedom, this “intelligent observer” is capable of compensating entropy production (or extracting work), apparently challenging the second law of thermodynamics...The authors demonstrate that, by performing such conditioned manipulations [by implementing a Maxwell’s demon], the entropy production can be controlled and even reduced [BUT still entropy production/increase, not entropy destruction/reduction as Maxwell Demon is supposed to achieve!].

Kostic's Comments: The above is misleading use of the Demon's name for some reason, since original Maxwell Demon (a wishful impossibility) is supposed to miraculously make non-equilibrium from thermal-equilibrium without due work, thus destroying entropy. Not to control entropy production (opposite from entropy destruction)!

"Invoking wishful Maxwell demon (to achieve a purposeful effect without required work effort) is the confirmation-proof of impossibility of such violation claims and misuse of the fundamental 2nd Law for self-attention-serving purposes or due to lack of proper tooling (conceptual, analytical, numerical or experimental limitations) and lack of comprehension. On microscopic and quantum scales the macroscopic quantities cannot be defined as such, but only as quasi-equivalents for certain comparisons, without true meanings. Furthermore, the time and spatial integrals of micro quantities have to result in macro quantities. Therefore, claiming violation of the 2nd Law on micro-scale or special processes is inappropriate and due to lack of full comprehension of the 2nd Law or desire for unjustified attention for self-serving purposes, including providing funding for unrealistic expectations. 

NOTE: Entropy (or The 2nd) Law (or our other laws) do NOT drive natural processes, but the other way around, the processes are only described/approximated by our laws. Processes are driven by non-equilibrium forces (force potentials), transferring or displacing mass-energy fluxes "towards" equilibrium (cause-and-effect phenomena) while dissipating non-equilibrium useful-energy to heat, thus generating entropy. In essence we do not control entropy production, but we control process forces "resulting to" some entropy production and other related quantities. However, no Demon (nor any other or quantum control) could destroy entropy to be overall reduced within all interacting systems! 

Experimental Test of Duncan's Paradox by Sheehan et al: Beyond the traditional (mis)understanding of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics

Sheehan, D.P., Mallin, D.J., Garamella, J.T. et al. Experimental Test of a Thermodynamic Paradox, Found Phys (2014) 44: 235. doi:10.1007/s10701-014-9781-5

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10701-014-9781-5

Kostic's Comments to clarify and refute the 2nd Law claims by Dr. Sheehan’s and his collaborators in their paper(LtoE)MD:

The last two concluding sentences of the paper [1] were, “In summary, Duncan’s temperature difference has been experimentally measured via differential hydrogen dissociation on tungsten and rhenium surfaces under high temperature blackbody cavity conditions. We know of no credible way to reconcile these results with standard interpretations of the second law.” The former sentence seems factual, except for the claim of ‘black-body cavity conditions’. But, even if within a black-body cavity (which should be a much larger size than the devices inside to minimize the latter influence on the former isothermal equilibrium), the existence of stationary non-uniform properties (non-uniform temperatures, etc.) will not violate the 2nd Law, see next. The last sentence of the paper is misplaced and faulty, since the paper results describe a non-homogeneous, structural equilibrium established after externally imposed non-equilibrium (by heating the container tube to very high temperatures), but the 2nd Law, is classically stated for simple compressible substances allowing heat-work interactions only (where temperature is uniform at equilibrium), and in general it describes 'process conditions' during spontaneous directional displacement of mass-energy (cyclic or stationary extraction of work), accompanied with irreversible generation (production) of entropy due to partial dissipation of work potential to thermal heat, which was not tested at all by the experiments [1], but only hypothetical, misleading and wishful claims stated. After all, before the '2nd Law violation' claims are stated, the reliable criteria for the 2nd Law violation, including proper definition and evaluation of entropy, should be established based on full comprehension of the fundamental Laws, see more at www.kostic.niu.edu/2ndLaw ... Read more ...

Consciousness is tied to 'entropy' say researchers (May Be A Side Effect Of Brain Trying To Maximize Entropy):

... "Such general statement is also meaningless since all processes are 'tied' to mass-energy exchange accompanied with its dissipation and entropy generation. Optimizing (maximizing or minimizing) entropy is relative and need further clarification: It is what it is, no more and no less... More generally, the “extrema principles,” the minimum and maximum entropy production principles, are elusive and not yet fully understood, see also Editorial ... The Second Law of Thermodynamics, and the entropy that quantifies its analysis, are sometimes subtle and thus may be confusing and misleading if not fully understood and properly accounted for ...

Microscopic and Quantum Challenges to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics

"Argonne researchers posit way to locally circumvent Second Law of Thermodynamics"

Media-frenzy in: Argonne * Phys.org * Futurism * Cosmos * Inverse * Popular Mech...etc.(email)* However:(

Kostic's Comments

"On microscopic and quantum scales the macroscopic quantities cannot be defined as such, but only as quasi-equivalents for certain comparisons, without true meanings. Furthermore, the time and spatial integrals of micro quantities have to result in macro quantities. Therefore, claiming violation of the 2nd Law on micro-scale or special processes is inappropriate and due to lack of full comprehension of the 2nd Law or desire for unjustified attention for self-serving purposes, including providing funding for unrealistic expectations. Invoking wishful Maxwell demon (to achieve a purposeful effect without required work effort) is the confirmation-proof of impossibility of such violation claims and misuse of the fundamental 2nd Law for self-attention-serving purposes or due to lack of proper tooling (conceptual, analytical, numerical or experimental limitations) and lack of comprehension.  After all, the wishful Maxwell demon could not be ever realized and most of the 2nd Law challenges have been resolved in the favor of the 2nd Law and never otherwise. It is self-evident that reversible processes are the most efficient and governed by limited laws of mechanics and physics, and they represent the ideal upper limit of the 2nd Law. The underlying mass-energy structures and processes at utmost micro scales are more complex and undetected at our present state of tooling and mental comprehension. However, their integral manifestation at macroscopic level are more realistically observable and reliable, thus being the 'check-and-balance' of microscopic and quantum hypotheses. Since true reversibility is present in equilibrium processes, but for real processes (process means directional forcing of displacement of mass-energy fluxes) at least an infinitesimal non-equilibrium forcing is necessary to provide direction, then all real processes should be at least infinitesimally irreversible, thus all real processes are irreversible, reversibility being an ideal limiting case (as well as the equilibrium). Since the macroscopic processes are integral outcomes of micro- and quanto-processes, then they also should be at least infinitesimally irreversible, even if non-observable at present state of tooling and comprehension (reversibility and equilibrium are only idializations, like many others) ... Read more ...

Reflections on Real (Thermodynamic) Entropy, Disorder and Statistical Information Entropy

"Entropy is "a measure" of thermal energy disorder, NOT measure of any (form) disorder. Entropy property, is a thermal displacement (dynamic thermal space) of thermal energy due to temperature as a thermal potential, dS=dQrev/T with J/K unit. It is a measure of thermal dynamic-disorder or thermal randomness in space and may be expressed as being related to logarithm of number of all thermal, dynamic microstates (position and momenta), or to the sum of their logarithmic probability or uncertainty, that correspond, or are consistent with the given thermodynamic macrostate. Note that the meanings of "all relevant adjectives" are deeply important to reflect reality, and as such, "disorder" has metaphoric description for real systems... Read more ...

Reflections on Caloric Theory and Thermal Energy 

"The complexity and confusions are due to rather complex mass-energy structures in nature and even more complex process-interactions with conversions of one form of energy to other(s) and therefore couplings, transfers and storage within a material substance mass-energy structures. The apparent duality (in "simple compressible substances") or multiplicity (in general) of "internal energy" is evident and quantified by measurement in reference data tables, and "thermal energy" is only qualitatively defined as part of internal energy, but the two are not the same;  see more at Reflections on the Caloric Theory and Thermal Energy ... Denying existence of thermal energy is the same as denying existence of its transfer (heat transfer)! Some deny existence of ‘Thermal energy’. Thermal and mechanical (and other types of) energies are distinguishable, NOT the same 'Internal energy' (as argued by some)! For example, 1 kJ heating is NOT the SAME as 1 kJ compressing! Philosophically, we cannot transfer something that does not exist. That is, we cannot transfer water unless we have water - we cannot transfer heat (transfer of thermal energy) unless we have thermal energy (stored as property or generated in a process). We cannot transfer energy (of any type) without having it somewhere (stored or generated) to transfer it, and then store it somewhere else (as property). In the process (while transferring) we may convert/reprocess, i.e., generate/produce (modify the "original structure") into another form, while conserving the underlying substructure (true elementary particles): existential (mass-energy) conservationism.

Nothing is wrong with the Caloric theory if there is no heat generation and work interactions - then, the thermal energy is conserved, i.e., when "Carnot thermal work potential" is dissipated then the thermal energy/caloric is conserved, i.e. calorimetry and classical heat transfer theory are as valid as always! ... Read more ...

Challenges to the Second Law Challengers: The 'challengers' need to demonstrate and quantify destruction of entropy to challenge the universal validity of the Second Law. It has been reasoned and thus proven here that destruction of entropy, i.e., violation of the Second Law, is against the forced tendency of natural processes and thus impossible, leaving 'No Hope' for the challengers. After all, the 'Wishful Maxwell's Demon' could not be realized since 1867... Read more ...

Kostic's Comments on 'Arrow of Time' as related to Siegel’s article, “Where Does Our Arrow of Time Come From?”

"Arrow of Time" is supposed to be a general concept independent from a clock design or an "observer personal perception," the way Thermodynamic temperature is independent of a thermometer design, or the light speed is independent of an observer speed. The time and entropy are being always irreversibly generated and over-all irreversibly increased. Therefore, the Thermodynamic Arrow of Time, i.e., irreversibility, thus directionality of all processes with entropy generation without exception, may be the answer to "Where Does Our Arrow Of Time Come From? [by Ethan Siegal]." Even if a reversible Arrow of time could go backwards, it will not be violation of the 2nd Law but its limiting ideal, reversible case.... Read more ... https://goo.gl/zr6q6D

Kostic's Comments on 'Common Law of Physics' on confusing and misleading article, "The Common Sense Law of Physics: Entropy, Evolution, and Open Systems" by Granville Sewell.

"Regarding the author’s statements in "The Common Sense Law of Physics (March 27, 2016, [1]): "examples of irreversible ‘entropy’ increases that have nothing to do with thermal entropy, such as tornadoes turning towns into rubble, explosions destroying buildings, or fires turning books into ashes… In these examples, "entropy" is generally used simply as a synonym for "disorder." This is actually not correct at all, since all these examples have everything to do with true, thermal entropy [2], since the mechanical work of tornado or chemical work (potential) of explosive or fire, do dissipate to heat and generate true (Thermodynamic or thermal) entropy. Such unfounded statements are incorrect as related to the fundamental laws of Thermodynamics, and as such misleading and deceiving. Furthermore, due to uniqueness and universality, that all energy forms ultimately converts/dissipate to thermal heat and thus produce true entropy, makes the latter to be universal measure of irreversibility of all processes in nature, always accompanied with mass-energy forced displacement... Read more ...

Kostic's Comments on 'Vortex Tubes' as related to Polihronov ’s email:

Dear Prof. Kostic: I came across your web page and thought the vortex tube effect would interest you. Air, injected tangentially into a pipe becomes refrigerated at the center and heated at periphery, in apparent violation of the second law of thermodynamics. Observed in 1933, it stayed unexplained for 80 years, during which time much debate was produced about it in the literature. Recently, an explanation was found by Polihronov and Straatman [Physical Review Letters, 054504, 2012; & Canadian Journal of Physics 93.999 (2015): 1-5] ... Sincerely, J. Polihronov

"I do not agree about "apparent violation of the second law of thermodynamics", see my recent abstract and presentation at: Challenges to the Second Law Challengers ... It surprises me that the observed Vortex Tube stayed unexplained for so long ("Observed in 1933, it stayed unexplained for 80 years, during which time much debate was produced about it in the literature."). It only confirms that the 2nd Law is not fully comprehended by many, even nowadays the 2nd Law universality is unjustifiably questioned :( The physics of the vortex tube is very clear to me: it is just another and interesting type of refrigeration device that achieves cooling by using external work of compressed air. The same compressed air could be used to run a turbine and produce work to run in turn a classical refrigeration machine. The reversible efficiency is independent of device type and real devices are always irreversible with lower efficiency - that is the meaning and spirit of the 2nd Law. Please feel to comment :)

Kostic's Comments on Removing the Mystery of Entropy and Thermodynamics regarding published articles by Harvey S. Leff

"While working on my manuscript, "Reflections on Carnot's 'Reflections on Motive Power of Fire': What Sadi Carnot Did and Did Not"  I have read, among others, series of articles, “Removing the Mystery of Entropy and Thermodynamics – Part I trough V” b Harvey S. Leff, Phys. Teach. 50 (Jan. p.28-31, Feb. p.87-90, Mar. p.170-172, Apr. p.215-217, May p.274-276) 2012,  and have a number of critical comments. Three issues are debated: (1) Importance of Sadi Carnot's treatise of reversible heat-engine cycles for Entropy definition; (2) Thermal energy versus Internal energy concepts in Thermodynamics; and (3) Disorder versus Spreading/Dispersal as statistical metaphorical-concepts of entropy; among others... Read more ... http://goo.gl/mXYGv

"Nothing occurs locally, nor globally in the universe, without mass-energy exchange/conversion and entropy production. It is crystal-clear (to me) that all confusions related to the far-reaching fundamental Laws of Thermodynamics, and especially the Second Law (Abstract-& FULL paper), are due to the lack of their genuine and subtle comprehension." > Sadi Carnot's Reflections <*> Clausius Theory of Heat <