Work Storage in States of Apparent Negative Thermodynamic Temperature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inverted quantum states provide a challenge to classical thermodynamics, since they appear to contradict the classical formulation of the second law of thermodynamics. Ramsey interpreted these states as stable equilibrium states of negative thermodynamic temperature, and added a provision to allow these states to the Kelvin-Planck statement of the second law [N. F. Ramsey, Phys. Rev. 103, 20 (1956)PHRVAO0031-899X10.1103/PhysRev.103.20]. Since then, Ramsey's interpretation has prevailed in the literature. Here, we present an alternative option to accommodate inverted states within thermodynamics, which strictly enforces the original Kelvin-Planck statement of the second law, and reconciles inverted states and the second law by interpreting the former as unstable states, for which no temperature-positive or negative-can be defined. Specifically, we recognize inverted quantum states as temperature-unstable states, for which all processes are in agreement with the original Kelvin-Planck statement of the second law, and positive thermodynamic temperatures in stable equilibrium states. These temperature-unstable states can only be created by work done to the system, which is stored as energy in the unstable states, and can be released as work again, just as in a battery or a spring.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".