Posted on 01/28/2005 4:28:41 PM PST by metacognative
This whole thing reminds me of when it was first perceived that the earth went around the sun. Perhaps in another thousand years ...
And when was that?
It's even worse than that.
Some people apparently think the Earth revolves around them!
See also Science Made Stupid by Tom Weller, available on Amazon.
Full Disclosure: It's a humor book, OK ??
The proof is left as an exercise to the interested reader... :-)
But his "Contact" page does.
BTW, he addressed more or less the same issue to me in a private Freep Mail.
Thanks to both of you...
Cheers!
Maxwell's demon.
Before you expect anyone to believe your version is a cited form of the equation, you had better cite it. I can tell you right now it couldn't be from any legit. source, because it's dimensionally incorrect; the units on the left side were different from the units on the right side. It's a ridiculous to a physical scientist as writing 2+2=3.
I would have thouth you would have said zero since you you left open the posibility of positive entopy change in your statement. Nice try, though. Strike ONE!
And we don't all have math fonts turned on.
Math fonts won't get you from reversible to irreverible cycles. Srike TWO!
I am open to a civil, moderated education on path variables and reversible cycles, please proceed. I suspect reversible cycles apply to open systems, because how could entropy increase over time in a closed system? See you later.
Let me quote from the same previous text:
"These equations (entropy) can be summarized by the statement that a natural process always takes place in such a direction as to cause an increase in the entropy of the system plus environment. In the case of an isolated system it is the entropy of the system that tends to increase."
Strike Three. You are OUT!
I notice you dropped the definition of "T". Did you discover your original error?
...and there it is, folks. We have a winner.
"Common sense" says the the Earth is flat and the Sun revolves around it. Don't rely too much on common sense, especially when close attention to the evidence indicates that things aren't quite as simple as "common sense" might indicate.
Case in point:
to see that water doesn't run uphill
"Doesn't", eh? As in never? You're obviously unfamiliar with hydraulic ram pumps, whereby water flowing horizontally forces a fraction of itself to flow up a pipe to an elevation higher than its original source.
No external energy is required, the water itself drives its own continuous motion uphill.
But wait, you whine, that's only because of some human's "intelligent design" in configuring the pump, right? Sorry, but there are natural hydraulic ram pumps, such as the Halona Blow Hole.
and neither does evolution
You might want to read the links in post #158 in order to correct your ignorance with regards to what evolution actually can and does do.
Then again, maybe you're quite comfortable with it.
Which "slander" would that be?
That IS the proof of ID (non)theory.
Can't argue with your source :-)
Lifewater International: Christians helping the rural poor
obtain safe water
What kind of school is this guy going to?
Who did God tell?
Proof that what I said was true about the lynch mob mentality of some of those in the scientific community who try to attack and destroy the character and credibility of those who would challenge one of their pet theories.
Leave Clinton's love life out of this!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.