Into the Night
Verified User
No. Go read it again.Didn't you recently tell the board that the "Definition" of entropy was e(t) < e(t+1)?
Science isn't a book.I have to tell you that was hilarious. Can you tell me which particular chemistry or physics text you got that "version" from? Because
Semantics fallacy. It does not matter. Strawman fallacy.(A) entropy is not represented by "e" but rather "S" in chemistry and physics.
You and ignore and discard it.(B) the second law is very specific.
Not possible. There is no such thing as a 'local' situation for the 2nd law of thermodynamics. You cannot compare two systems as if they are the same system. False equivalence fallacy.There are local situations in which the entropy term is actually NEGATIVE (ie entropy decreases)
The system chosen must be closed AND consistent. No energy source of sink from outside the chosen system may be considered. You cannot compare two systems as if they are the same system.but the key to the second law is that in a CLOSED system such that no energy can come into the system.
Not possible. There is no 'locally'.This is where entropy always increases. And it applies to the universe since universally entropy increases, but there are many situations in which entropy actually DECREASES LOCALY
A refrigerator cannot form ice on it's own. Therefore, you cannot consider any energy source powering the refrigerator or any energy sink such as radiating coils.(ie inside your refrigerator when ice is formed, that's a situation where the entropy of the water goes to a LOWER value as it crystallizes.
False equivalence fallacy. You cannot compare two systems as if they are the same system.The reason your fridge doesn't violate the Second Law is that it dumps a bunch of heat to the external world which causes the overall entropy of the universe to increase.
If you choose the closed system of power plant, refrigerator, and house, entropy is still increasing. There is no 'local'. If you consider just the refrigerator itself, there is no power. No ice.
Buzzword fallacy. Non-sequitur fallacy.If you want to know how chemists think about entropy try looking at the Gibbs Free Energy equation.
Non-sequitur fallacy.Then go look up some values in the literature for entropy of various reactions.
You cannot use buzzwords to make the 2nd law of thermodynamics go away. You cannot compare two systems as if they are the same system either.