Abstract
In the eighteenth century, mankind, British inventors among the first, discovered in steam engines a new use of coal fire—a discovery that led to the advent in the nineteenth century of a _science of heat_, a new branch of physics. The core of this science is referred to as the Joule-Thomson-Maxwell energy conversion narrative. The principle of the degradation of energy was central to the energy conversion narrative. The principle and the later entropy principle are so closely connected that “entropy and the dissipation of energy are as inseparable as Siamese twins.” But Maxwell had a different take: “the doctrine of the dissipation of energy is closely connected with that of the growth of entropy but is by no means identical with it.” One logical choice for the energy conversion narrative with universal degradation of energy is that the narrative needs a first step to initiate it. But insisting that _every_ step of the narrative be an energy conversion step, including the starting step of the reversible transformation of a chemical mixture into a chemical product and work, is a mistake. The paper examines the narrative critically, arriving at a conclusion that pinpoints why energy dissipation is “by no means identical with” entropy growth.
Full text
621 characters
· extracted from
oa-doi-fallback
· click to expand
There is a newer version available for this {{ publicationType }}. View latest version
{{ publication.field_name }}
{{ publication.subfield_name }}
Copyright: © {{ publicationYear }} {{ publication.presentation_authors[0].full_name + (publication.presentation_authors.length > 1 ? ' et al' : '') }}. This is an open access publication distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Check the {{ publicationType | capitalize }} Source for copyright and license information.
Listen on
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.