Authors: Hui-Hai Liu
To seek the thermodynamic basis for the well-known Maximum Entropy Production (MEP) principle has recently received considerable attention in the scientific community. However, a little success has been achieved in the reconciliation between the MEP and the currently existing physical laws. In fact, the MEP is not a fundamental physical principle, because it is not consistent with the minimization of energy expenditure rate (MEE) principle that has been supported by observations for water flow on the ground surface. A fundamental physical principle should be able to explain observations from different areas. To resolve the inconsistence, Liu (2014), based on observations from different geological systems, proposed a new thermodynamic hypothesis that states that a nonlinear natural system that is not isolated and involves positive feedbacks tends to minimize its resistance to the flow process through it that is imposed by its environment. He also shows that the MEP is actually a by-product of the minimization of heat transfer resistance in the Earth-atmosphere system under a relatively restrictive condition. This communication further derives that previous result in the more general case for the Earth-atmosphere system. The consistence between the thermodynamic hypothesis of Liu (2014) and Darwin’s evolution theory is also briefly touched on. All these support the validity of the hypothesis of Liu (2014).
Comments: 6 Pages.
[v1] 2015-01-03 11:04:23
Unique-IP document downloads: 173 times
Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.