Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Second Law of Thermodynamics Violated
Scientific American ^ | July 24, 2002 | Sarah Graham

Posted on 07/30/2002 5:59:04 PM PDT by vannrox

July 24, 2002

Second Law of Thermodynamics Violated

It seems that something odd happens to the second law of thermodynamics when systems get sufficiently small. The law states that the entropy, or disorder, of the universe increases over time and it holds steadfast for large-scale systems. For instance, whereas a hot beverage will spontaneously dissipate heat to the surrounding air (an increase in disorder), the air cannot heat the liquid without added energy. Nearly a decade ago, scientists predicted that small assemblages of molecules inside larger systems may not always abide by the principle. Now Australian researchers writing in the July 29 issue of Physical Review Letters report that even larger systems of thousands of molecules can also undergo fleeting energy increases that seem to violate the venerable law.

Genmiao M. Wang of the Australian National University and colleagues discovered the anomaly when they dragged a micron-sized bead through a container of water using optical tweezers. The team found that, on occasion, the water molecules interacted with the bead in such a way that energy was transferred from the liquid to the bead. These additional kicks used the random thermal motion of the water to do the work of moving the bead, in effect yielding something for nothing. For periods of movement lasting less than two seconds, the bead was almost as likely to gain energy from the water as it was to add energy to the reservoir, the investigators say. No useful amounts of energy could be extracted from the set-up, however, because the effect disappeared if the bead was moved for time intervals greater than two seconds.

The findings suggest that the miniaturization of machines may have inherent limitations. Noting that nanomachines are not simply "rescaled versions of their larger counterparts," the researchers conclude that "as they become smaller, the probability that they will run in reverse inescapably becomes greater."

--Sarah Graham



TOPICS: Science
KEYWORDS:
Very Interesting.
1 posted on 07/30/2002 5:59:04 PM PDT by vannrox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: vannrox
So, for a couple of seconds the Second Law may or may not have been violated but after that it holds true?
2 posted on 07/30/2002 6:03:45 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Man Wins Big at Casino: Laws of Probability Violated
3 posted on 07/30/2002 6:06:13 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Yeah, interesting. I wonder why the effect stopped after two seconds?
4 posted on 07/30/2002 6:06:17 PM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
LOL! Woman gets $3 M in McDonald's coffee experiment.
5 posted on 07/30/2002 6:07:24 PM PDT by sauropod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Have you ever wondered if maybe our solar system is just an atom in a universe the next size up from ours?
6 posted on 07/30/2002 6:08:49 PM PDT by Dakmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Does this mean I should get out of my Kia Rio, and trade up for a SUV?
7 posted on 07/30/2002 6:09:00 PM PDT by TJFLSTRAT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dakmar
Only when I'm watching Animal House.
8 posted on 07/30/2002 6:10:06 PM PDT by Fixit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
So, as they get smaller, the probability that they will run in unexpected directions increases? LOL. That is the second law.
9 posted on 07/30/2002 6:11:27 PM PDT by patton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Democrats say we need a new law.

Republicans say we just need to enforce the Second Law.
10 posted on 07/30/2002 6:19:42 PM PDT by gitmo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
they dragged a micron-sized bead through a container of water using optical tweezers.


If they dragged a dollar-sized bill through a trailer park using optical tweezers, -
- someone would steal the tweezers.

11 posted on 07/30/2002 6:20:05 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
hehe...
12 posted on 07/30/2002 6:20:13 PM PDT by Michael Barnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Someone needs to tell Congress. According to Peter Beckman in the 'History of Pi' (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-form/103-3935718-5868657) US law forbides patenting a perpetual motion machine. It seems that at one time so many ingenious crackpot designs for perpetual motion machines were received that the US Patent Office had to maintain a small staff whose sole responsibility was examining and ultimately rejecting designs for perpetual motion machines. To cut this Gordian knot, the Congress simply outlawed them.
13 posted on 07/30/2002 6:20:36 PM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
Now I am worried about my very existence.
14 posted on 07/30/2002 6:20:58 PM PDT by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: gitmo
Democrats say we need a new law.

Republicans say we just need to enforce the Second Law.

LOL! Okay, that was the thread winner.

15 posted on 07/30/2002 6:22:20 PM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

To: Tropoljac; Lazamataz
"Lisa, in this house we obey the second law of thermodynamics!" - Homer Simpson

I want a recount, I think this was the best post!

17 posted on 07/30/2002 7:53:53 PM PDT by Dakmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Now Australian researchers writing in the July 29 issue of Physical Review Letters report that even larger systems of thousands of molecules can also undergo fleeting energy increases that seem to violate the venerable law.

What is the news here? If you have a die (D6) in which two faces are red but all the other faces are white and you roll it repeatedly, you are almost certainly going to get more whites than reds. On the other hand, you will also almost certainly have streaks in which you get more reds than whites.

Suppose in a given sized system, the smallest streak of reds that is detectable is a run of 50. Even rolling the die a trillion times a second, one would on average only get such a streak once every 23,000 years. Not likely to happen.

Now suppose that in a smaller system it's possible to detect a run of 25 reds. Even if one only rolls the die a million times a second (a millionth as often as in the larger system) one would expect to see about one such run every 10 days.

In macroscopic systems, the probability of significantly anomalous behaviors is so close to zero that for all practical purposes they just don't happen. At extremely small scales, however, such events start to enter the realm of possibility; at somewhat smaller scales they may even become probable.

18 posted on 07/31/2002 10:06:41 PM PDT by supercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patton
So, as they get smaller, the probability that they will run in unexpected directions increases? LOL. That is the second law.

Well put.

19 posted on 07/31/2002 10:07:46 PM PDT by supercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson