A New Thermodynamics

By Kent W. Mayhew

www.newthermodynamics.com

thermowebsite2009018.jpg thermowebsite2009015.jpg thermowebsite2009013.jpg thermowebsite2009010.jpg thermowebsite2009009.jpg thermowebsite2009008.jpg thermowebsite2009006.jpg
Help support this site


Traditional Problematic Thermodynamics

In his 1917“Treatise on Thermodynamics” Planck acknowledges that there are two ways to formulate thermodynamics. 1): “We may take for granted the correctness of the mechanical view of nature, and assume that all changes in nature can be reduced to motions of materials points between which there act forces which have a potential. Then the principle of energy is simply the well-known mechanical theorem of kinetic theory, generalized to include all natural processes.” Or 2): As is traditionally done; “leave open the question concerning the possibility of reducing all natural processes to those of motion, and start from the fact which has been tested by centuries of human experience and repeatedly verified ”…”no way possible to have perpetual motion,

Of course by following Planck's 2), we have crafted (wrongly?) the second law into the supreme postulate!

 In order to preserve the integrity of the second law the science has become enshrined with conviently ignored problematic concerns. In this attached Chapter from my book, I accomplishes two things(click: PDF file to the top right of this page) . Firstly, it ensures that we are on the same page concerning thermodynamic terminology and concepts. Secondly it brings to light some of these concerns, opening your eyes to the prospect that the science needs to be rewritten based upon constructive logic i.e. the other way that being Planck’s previously stated 1).

Truth be known, traditional thermodynamics has become an over-complication of simple realities all in a quest to wrongly maintain the second law, as the supreme postulate. If you read my book and/or go through this website you too may exclaim: " My my how the words of  mighty Eddington's have now fallen."     

An example of problematic thermodynamics is the consideration of expanding and or compressing gaseous systems.  

As discusssed above: In order to understand why traditional thermodynamics is so problematic perhaps it is best to download and then read the pdf to the top right, which is taken from Chapter 1 of my book: "  New Thermodynamics: Say no to entropy"

 

 

 

  

Help support this site
Sommerfield quote:"Thermodynamics is a funny subject. The first time you go through it, you don't understand it at all. The second time you go through it, you think you understand it, except for one or two small points. The third time you go through it, you know you don't understand it, but by that time you are so used to it, so it doesn't bother you any more."
 The following quote by Authur Eddington demonstrates the purity of human arrogance that can lend itself to the complete indoctrination of a poorly conceived science

“The law that entropy always increases, holds, I think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations — then so much the worse for Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation — well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation.”

Problematic entropy

 

 

 

  

Problematic second law

 

 

 

  

Problematic statistical

 

 

 

  

Problematic first law

 

 

 

  

thermowebsite2009001.jpg