Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #392748

Re: Second Law of Thermodynamics: Obviously False

Show all headers | View raw

Pentcho Valev wrote:
> 
> http://bip.cnrs-mrs.fr/bip10/valevfaq.htm
>  Athel Cornish-Bowden 1998: "Can a catalyst shift the position of an equilibrium? No. Absolutely not if it is a true catalyst present at very low concentrations. If it is present at a concentration comparable with that of one or more of the reactants then it may appear to shift the position of equilibrium by mass action effects. However, when it does this it is acting as a reactant, not as a catalyst. Mr Valev’s claims to have shown otherwise are analysed by Lukasz Salwinski (1, 2, 3, 4) and P
> 
> My career as an iconoclast started when I noticed that catalysts obviously can shift chemical equilibrium, which is fatal for the second law of thermodynamics. About 20 years ago I submitted a one-page article to Nature showing that, for the dissociation-association reaction
> 
> A <-> B + C,
> 
> a catalyst cannot speed up both the forward and reverse reaction rates equally, and the reason is that the forward and the reverse catalytic mechanisms are totally different. In the forward (dissociation) reaction, the catalyst should just meet and split A. So the forward rate can be increased substantially. In the reverse (association) reaction, the catalyst should first get together B and C, which, if the (reverse) reaction is diffusion-controlled, would have no effect. Diffusion control means
> 
> Nature immediately rejected my article - 20 years ago a person suggesting that catalysts can shift chemical equilibrium and so violate the second law was crank, crackpot, troll, or worse, by definition. Then things started to change, and nowadays the situation is entirely different:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan%27s_Paradox
>  "Consider a dimeric gas (A2) that is susceptible to endothermic dissociation or exothermic recombination (A2 <-> 2A). The gas is housed between two surfaces (S1 and S2), whose chemical reactivities are distinct with respect to the gas. Specifically, let S1 preferentially dissociate dimer A2 and desorb monomer A, while S2 preferentially recombines monomers A and desorbs dimer A2. [...]
> 
> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/NatureSLTD-Fig1c.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> Pentcho Valev



I'm from Brooklyn..
I've seen old buildings fall,
and new buildings come up
in it's place.

Order comes from disorder.

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Second Law of Thermodynamics: Obviously False Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-05 00:53 -0700
  Re: Second Law of Thermodynamics: Obviously False Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-06 04:18 -0700
    Re: Second Law of Thermodynamics: Obviously False Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-06 23:51 -0700
      Re: Second Law of Thermodynamics: Obviously False Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-09-07 09:45 -0500
      Re: Second Law of Thermodynamics: Obviously False Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-09 08:33 -0700
        Re: Second Law of Thermodynamics: Obviously False Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 08:47 -0700
        Re: Second Law of Thermodynamics: Obviously False Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-11 01:38 -0700
          Re: Second Law of Thermodynamics: Obviously False Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 02:44 -0700
          Re: Second Law of Thermodynamics: Obviously False Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-17 06:04 -0700
            Re: Second Law of Thermodynamics: Obviously False The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-17 13:30 -0700
  Re: Second Law of Thermodynamics: Obviously False JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-09-06 14:01 -0700
  Re: Second Law of Thermodynamics: Obviously False alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-17 11:37 -0700
    Re: Second Law of Thermodynamics: Obviously False JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-09-17 12:30 -0700

csiph-web