The Auxiliary Components of Thermodynamic Theory and Their Nonempirical, Algorithmic Nature (original) (raw)

The laws of thermodynamics and Homo sapiens the engineer

WIT Transactions on State-of-the-art in Science and Engineering, 2006

One of the key developments in the university scene since the publications of The Origin of Species has been the emergence of engineering as a discipline in its own right. Over the same timescale the realization has developed that the laws of thermodynamics, universal in their engineering scope, must also apply to biology and living systems. As a matter of historical fact, the relationship between biology and thermodynamics had a bad start, and the reasons for this are discussed. Now one of the foundation concepts for thermodynamics is that of the heat engine, stemming from the radical achievement of the Industrial Revolution of being able to produce mechanical work from heat. In this chapter, we find that by redefining the heat engine in terms of output, all organisms can be viewed as 'survival engines', certain animal species and man as 'work engines', and man himself as a 'complexity engine'. A number of examples are taken from the process of building the dome of the cathedral at Florence by Brunelleschi, a defining moment in the history of the Renaissance. This interpretation of Homo sapiens is consistent with Lumsden and Wilson's assessment of man as being the only eucultural species: various consequences of this are discussed. The chapter completes our trilogy of studies on the laws of thermodynamics, by then focusing on the possibility of further laws for living organisms, especially Kauffman's proposal for a fourth law. Finally, a concluding discussion entitled 'How mathematical is biology?' highlights the question of including mathematics as part of that integration.

Reconsidering the Foundations of Thermodynamics from an Engineering Perspective

Currently, there are two approaches to the foundations of thermodynamics. One, associated with the mechanistic Clausius-Boltzmann tradition, is favored by the physics community. The other, associated with the post-mechanical Carnot tradition, is favored by the engineering community. The bold hypothesis is that the conceptual foundation of engineering thermodynamics is the more comprehensive. Therefore, contrary to the dominant consensus, engineering thermodynamics (ET) represents the true foundation of thermodynamics. The foundational issue is crucial to a number of unresolved current and historical issues in thermodynamic theory and practice. ET formally explains the limited successes of the 'rational mechanical' approaches as idealizing special cases. Thermodynamic phenomena are uniquely dissymmetric and can never be completely understood in terms of symmetry-based mechanical concepts. Consequently, ET understands thermodynamic phenomena in new way, in terms of the post-mechanical formulation of action. The ET concept of action and the action framework trace back to Maupertuis's Principle of Least Action, both clarified in the engineering worldview research program of Lazare and Sadi Carnot. Despite the intervening Lagrangian 'mechanical idealization of action', the original dualistic, indeterminate engineering understanding of action, somewhat unexpectedly, re-emerged in Planck's quantum of action. The link between engineering thermodynamics and quantum theory is not spurious and each of our current formulations helps us develop our understanding of the other. Both the ET and quantum theory understandings of thermodynamic phenomena, as essentially dissymmetric (viz. embracing complementary), entail that there must be an irreducible, cumulative historical, qualitatively emergent, aspect of reality.

RESEARCH INTO THE ORIGINS OF ENGINEERING THERMODYNAMICS

This paper draws attention to a series of misconceptions and misstatements regarding the origin and meaning of some of the most basic concepts of engineering thermodynamics. The six examples exhibited in the paper relate to the concepts of reversibility, entropy, mechanical equivalent of the calorie, the first law of thermodynamics for open systems, enthalpy and the Diesel cycle. A complete list of the pioneering references concludes the paper. Obiective The discipline of Engineering Thermodynamics revolves around a relatively large number of good introductory treatments, which-in my view-are all very similar except for certain variations in writing style and graphics quality. It would seem that for generation after generation Engineering Thermodynamics has flowed from one book into the next, essentially unchanged. Today the textbooks describe a seemingly moribund engineering discipline, that is, a subject void of controversy and, most regrettably, references. As students, we are brought in contact with a discipline whose step-by-step innovations seem to have been long forgotten. Traveling back in time to "rediscover" the origins of the discipline is a task tackled only by a curious few. This situation presents a tremendous opportunity for the researcher. I recognized this opportunity four years ago when I began work on a graduate treatise on engineering thermodynamics [1]. In the course of that work I made numerous trips to the Library of Congress, in Washington, DC, where many of the original writings can be located. The many facts and references I discovered are 571

Scientific mental representations of Thermodynamics

Science & Education, 1996

The analysis of a certain number of textbooks on Thermodynamics is expounded with the aim of showing that several “mental representations” of this subject matter are present in scientific literature. This analysis points out divergent attitudes not only towards the definition of fundamental concepts principles, but also towards the epistemological status of Thermodynamics. These attitudes underlie-sometimes tacitly-the relationship between the macroscopic and the microscopic approach on one side and between the “state” or “process” approach on the other. We also show the importance of both the historical reconstruction and the epistemological analysis for a deeper understanding of what these different mental representations underlie and entail.

Outline to an Architectonics of Thermodynamics

Contingency and Plasticity in Everyday Technologies, 2022

The current urgency of ecological matters has initiated a new philosophical concern with the relation between life and thermodynamics (the science of energy and entropy). French philosopher Bernard Stiegler has consequently proposed that anthropogenic climate change-the Anthropocene-be renamed the 'Entropocene.' 1 His justification for offering another kenos to the already long list of alternatives is that anthropogenic climate change is largely conditioned by an acceleration in the rate of entropy production-thermodynamically definable as the unidirectional (from hot to cold) transfer of heat between systems (classical thermodynamics) or the probabilistic distribution of particle energy (statistical mechanics). In support of Stiegler's proposition, theoretical biologist Maël Montévil argues that this acceleration of entropy is being produced at multiple levels from the thermodynamic to the 'biological and the social.' 2 Stored energy in the form of fossil fuels continues to be dissipated at an industrial rate, biodiversity and 'anti-entropy' 3 (what Montévil, after Giuseppe Longo and Francis Bailly, defines as the functional complexity that contributes to an organism's 'persistence' through time) is declining faster than expected and political alternatives to capitalism, ones that might offer actual socio-ecological solutions have all but disappeared. Following Stiegler, this chapter argue that a philosophy of entropy is needed.

How not to integrate the history and philosophy of science: a reply to Chalmers

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 2010

Alan Chalmers uses Robert Boyle's mechanical philosophy as an example of the irrelevance of 'philosophy' to 'science' and criticizes my 2006 book Atoms and alchemy for overemphasizing Boyle's successes. The present paper responds as follows: first, it argues that Chalmers employs an overly simplistic methodology insensitive to the distinction between historical and philosophical claims; second, it shows that the central theses of Atoms and alchemy are untouched by Chalmers's criticisms; and third, it uses Boyle's analysis of subordinate causes and his debate with Henry More in the 1670s to demonstrate the inadequacy of Chalmers's construal of the mechanical philosophy.

A Novel Sequence of Exposition of Engineering Thermodynamics *

Journal of Energy Resources Technology, 2014

We present the foundations of thermodynamics in a novel sequence in which all basic concepts are defined in terms of well known mechanical ideas. Many definitions are new. The order of introduction of concepts is: system (constituents and parameters); properties; state; energy (without heat and work) and energy balance; classification of states in terms of time evolution; existence of stable equilibrium states; available energy; entropy (without heat and temperature) of any state (equilibrium or not) and entropy balance; properties of stable equilibrium states; temperature in terms of energy and entropy; chemical potentials; pressure; work; heat; applications of balances. This novel sequence not only generalizes the subject of thermodynamics to all systems (large or small) and all states (equilibrium and not equilibrium) but also avoids both the conceptual and definitional difficulties that have been recognized by so many teachers, and the confusion experienced by so many students.