Here you go you dumbs$%&#@

[The King]

Yes. I always consult the Barnes and Noble arrangement for determining everything too! We're like twins!

So do I, therefore it must be true!

[Maddhattter]

Madhatter, energy isn't conserved via the 1st law of Thermo.

Yes, it is. That's the entire first law of thermodynamics. It simply states that in thermodynamics, the energy still adhere's to the law of energy conservation. The law of conservation of energy explicitly states energy cannot be created or destroyed. It only changes forms.

That's why the 2nd Law came into being. The 2nd Law disproves the concept of perpetual motion machines.

No, again. The second law of thermodynamics came into being because there were still observations that were unaccounted for by the first law. The second law does not modify the first at all, it appends.

The 2nd law only states that, in general, the total entropy of a system will not decrease without increasing the entropy of another system. Entropy, in this sense, only indicates that as energy is transferred, the direction it flows becomes increasingly less predictable. In simpler terms, the energy only becomes disordered, or entropic. The energy doesn't disappear, we only lose track of it or it becomes unusable by us with our current technology level.

Go read what Carnot, Plank, and Kelvin wrote long ago.

Be more specific. Nothing that I've read that these men have said, as it pertains to physics and thermodynamics, agree with your position or disagree with mine.

And then go drive your car around the block and tell me where all the potential energy of the gasoline went

It changed forms. The majority of it was bled off as heat, both in radiant head and friction. Some of it is transferred into kinetic energy. Per the first law of thermodynamics, I can say with confidence that 100% of the energy still exists, just in a different form and location.

and then tell me how you are going to get all 100% of it back.

I can't do this. As it currently stands, we are unable to do this. However, it's possible that could change as science progresses.

In case you didn't know it the average internal combustion engine actually produces power around 20% of the chemical potential of the fuel being burned.

No, it can only utilize about that much. All of the energy of the fuel being burned is produced.

The rest of the energy is wasted mostly as heat and of course pushing exhaust gases around.

But it's still produced and still exists after it's "wasted".

That heat energy is then dissipated by the surrounding universe and gone for good.... damn entropy.

It's dissipated in that it has transferred it's energy to other places and transferred it to other forms, yes. However, 100% of that energy still exists. Yay for conservation of energy! Now, I'll agree, after it's changed form/location in that way, it's no longer useful to us but that doesn't mean it's just gone.

You can measure that energy lost to disorder and call it some variable.... oh I don't know maybe "S."

"Energy lost" in the context of entropy is only energy that is unable to be converted into work, like heat. That doesn't change the fact that the energy still exists, just not in a form we know how to utilize.

It's also important to point out that, in calculating "S", the entire model is based on the conservation of energy.

Then once you start realizing every system imaginable will result in some S. You will realize that no system will ever just spontaneously explode without some input energy that wasn't there to begin with, hence the big bang theory is just that a "theory."

Since there was no explosion, that's not a problem. The big bang theory states, only, that there was an expansion. Considering all energy would have been compressed into the singularity along with all matter, the resulting energetic molecules would be bouncing around all(due to heat and kinetic transfer) over the place and knocking each other away. Seeing as that would result in both entropy and the expansion of both matter and energy, there is no problem with the 2nd law.

It's almost like physicists and cosmologists know about the laws of thermodynamics and still accept the big bang theory as the best of the available models based on the evidence...

The 2nd of Law of Thermo leads to entropy, which we can measure as a variable S.

No, the 2nd law states there will be entropy.

And S always goes up, never down. Even in a reversible process, S always increases. So the universe is energy limited. One day we will run out. We can observe this driving around on a tank of gas, or studying the life cycles of stars, etc.

Yes, the universe is energy limited. No, we will not run out of energy. We will run out of usable concentrations of energy one day. All energy, per the 1st law, will still exist. It will only be dispersed and not in a usable form. Again, that damned "energy conservation" thing.

[Strychnine]

[racrguy]

There you go. Nothing is 100% efficient. That's entropy. The energy existed at one time (as in past tense) and it doesn't exist anymore. Again, that's entropy. And this isn't a theory. It's fact and you confirmed yet, somehow when you add 2 and 2, you get 5 for some reason.

Next time you have a thought. Just stop here.



And I already said gravity is real and can be measured. It's already been tested. However since you don't believe me, maybe you should take your own advice.

Just shut the fuck up. Just because you can't harness the energy doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Also, laws are the mathematical portion of the theory. In science, there is no higher state of validity than a theory, the the scientific word and the colloquial term of theory mean two different things. Educate yourself on what science actually says, and not what some crackpot who doesn't know their ass from a hole in the ground says.

[exlude]

I personally appreciate when people open with "it's just a theory." It immediately tells me that this person has spent minimal time in scientific studies. In Anthony's case, I was wondering if he passed high school physics. Now I'm starting to question he did well enough to get passed elementary school "this is science" type class.

[46Tbird]

I personally appreciate when people open with "it's just a theory." It immediately tells me that this person has spent minimal time in scientific studies. In Anthony's case, I was wondering if he passed high school physics. Now I'm starting to question he did well enough to get passed elementary school "this is science" type class.

It kind of seems like he only heard what he wanted to hear.

[Strychnine]

Madhatter, energy isn't conserved via the 1st law of Thermo. That's why the 2nd Law came into being. The 2nd Law disproves the concept of perpetual motion machines.

Whoa there, kemosabe.

The ENTIRE first law relates to the conservation of energy. The whole thing. That's the point. The sum of mass and energy will ALWAYS be the same.

First Law of Thermodynamics:
Energy can be changed from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed. The total amount of energy and matter in the Universe remains constant, merely changing from one form to another

0+5 = 5
1+4 = 5
2+3 = 5
3+2 = 5
4+1 = 5
5+0 = 5

The second law, putting entropy in layman's terms, says:

in all energy exchanges, if no energy enters or leaves the system, the potential energy of the state will always be less than that of the initial state

Zeroth law - equlibrium
First law - statement of conservation
Second law - direction of conservation
Third law - absolute zero


Do we need to get some Bill Nye up in here?

[mstng86]

thermodynamics shit

psssh even I knew that

[racrguy]

Do we need to get some Bill Nye up in here?

Yes.

[Maddhattter]

Whoa there, kemosabe.

The ENTIRE first law relates to the conservation of energy. The whole thing. That's the point. The sum of mass and energy will ALWAYS be the same.



0+5 = 5
1+4 = 5
2+3 = 5
3+2 = 5
4+1 = 5
5+0 = 5

The second law, putting entropy in layman's terms, says:


Zeroth law - equlibrium
First law - statement of conservation
Second law - direction of conservation
Third law - absolute zero


Do we need to get some Bill Nye up in here?

[Nash B.]

In before he claims to know more about thermodynamics because he goes to more games than the rest of us.

[AnthonyS]

Whoa there, kemosabe.

The ENTIRE first law relates to the conservation of energy. The whole thing. That's the point. The sum of mass and energy will ALWAYS be the same.



0+5 = 5
1+4 = 5
2+3 = 5
3+2 = 5
4+1 = 5
5+0 = 5

The second law, putting entropy in layman's terms, says:

Quote:
in all energy exchanges, if no energy enters or leaves the system, the potential energy of the state will always be less than that of the initial state


Zeroth law - equlibrium
First law - statement of conservation
Second law - direction of conservation
Third law - absolute zero


Do we need to get some Bill Nye up in here?

What part of "less than" is so confusing to you stupid mofos? And the "less than" of the first law means the first law isn't true. It's also why no one has ever built a Carnot engine or perpetual motion machine because it's fucking impossible. The Carnot engine fits the first law perfectly but nothing in nature or real or tangible does.

You guys must still believe in Santa too.

Less than just what the fuck does that mean to you idiots? What fucking universe does less than equal conserved?

[The King]

^^^^^

You'd think this was a thread about baseball the way this guy is throwing a hissy fit

[exlude]

What part of "less than" is so confusing to you stupid mofos? And the "less than" of the first law means the first law isn't true. It's also why no one has ever built a Carnot engine or perpetual motion machine because it's fucking impossible. The Carnot engine fits the first law perfectly but nothing in nature or real or tangible does.

You guys must still believe in Santa too.

Less than just what the fuck does that mean to you idiots? What fucking universe does less than equal conserved?

You know potential energy isn't the only energy in a system, right?

[Maddhattter]

What part of "less than" is so confusing to you stupid mofos?

No part of it. Less potential energy != less energy.

And the "less than" of the first law means the first law isn't true.

No, it doesn't. The energy is converted from potential energy to a different type of energy.

It's also why no one has ever built a Carnot engine or perpetual motion machine because it's fucking impossible. The Carnot engine fits the first law perfectly but nothing in nature or real or tangible does.

It's only impossible right now. Even when Carnot stated it was impossible, he said it with the caveat that "impossible" meant "impossible with our current understanding".

You guys must still believe in Santa too.

Not sure how you're failure to understand the laws of thermodynamics has anything to do with other people believing in Santa. However, this is incorrect as well. But based on your track record here, I doubt it's any surprise to anyone.

Less than just what the fuck does that mean to you idiots? What fucking universe does less than equal conserved?

Again, the quote states it will have less potential energy. It's no longer potential energy once it's actualized into mechanical, thermal, or other types of energy. No energy goes away, it only stops being potential and becomes another type of energy.