MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1861350022 · doi:10.5539/apr.v7n5p39

Toward the True Second Law Part II: The Untenable Assumption of Current Second Law Thermodynamics and the Come into being of the Negentropic Formulation

2015· article· en· W1861350022 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
José Iñiguez

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecond law of thermodynamicsEntropy (arrow of time)Work (physics)Laws of thermodynamicsThermodynamicsIrreversible processStatistical physicsExtended irreversible thermodynamicsFirst law of thermodynamicsNon-equilibrium thermodynamicsTheoretical physicsPhysicsLawMathematical economicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Second law thermodynamics’, as currently understood, is here proved to be a body of knowledge essentially different from that of Clausius. The rejection on logical grounds of its basic tenet –heat and work as energy forms of the same quality in reversible processes- leads, through a revision of Clausius’ work, to a new body of knowledge, ‘the Negentropic Formulation’, taken by this author to be the true second law of thermodynamics. In it the total entropy change for any given work-producing thermodynamic process is found to be determined by the combination of the opposite sign contributions of the entropic (work degrading) and negentropic (work producing) transformations in it taking place. The efficiency-dependent prevalence of one of these opposites over the other opens the door for irreversible processes with positive, negative, or zero total entropy changes. This notion is at the center of a testable prediction pertaining self-organizing phenomena.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ResearchSame topicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical MechanicsFrench-language works237,207