Version 1
: Received: 7 July 2018 / Approved: 9 July 2018 / Online: 9 July 2018 (13:07:30 CEST)
How to cite:
Bristol, T. Reconsidering the Foundations of Thermodynamics from an Engineering Perspective. Preprints2018, 2018070139. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201807.0139.v1
Bristol, T. Reconsidering the Foundations of Thermodynamics from an Engineering Perspective. Preprints 2018, 2018070139. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201807.0139.v1
Bristol, T. Reconsidering the Foundations of Thermodynamics from an Engineering Perspective. Preprints2018, 2018070139. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201807.0139.v1
APA Style
Bristol, T. (2018). Reconsidering the Foundations of Thermodynamics from an Engineering Perspective. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201807.0139.v1
Chicago/Turabian Style
Bristol, T. 2018 "Reconsidering the Foundations of Thermodynamics from an Engineering Perspective" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201807.0139.v1
Abstract
Currently, there are two approaches to the foundations of thermodynamics. One, associated with the mechanistical Clausius-Boltzmann tradition, is favored by the physics community. The other, associated with the post-mechanical Carnot tradition, is favored by the engineering community. The bold hypothesis is that the conceptual foundation of engineering thermodynamics is the more comprehensive. Therefore, contrary to the dominant consensus, engineering thermodynamics (ET) represents the true foundation of thermodynamics. The foundational issue is crucial to a number of unresolved current and historical issues in thermodynamic theory and practice. ET formally explains the limited successes of the ‘rational mechanical’ approaches as idealizing special cases. Thermodynamic phenomena are uniquely dissymmetric and can never be completely understood in terms of symmetry-based mechanical concepts. Consequently, ET understands thermodynamic phenomena in new way, in terms of the post-mechanical formulation of action. The ET concept of action and the action framework trace back to Maupertuis’s Principle of Least Action, both clarified in the engineering worldview research program of Lazare and Sadi Carnot. Despite the intervening Lagrangian ‘mechanical idealization of action’, the original dualistic, indeterminate engineering understanding of action, somewhat unexpectedly, re-emerged in Planck’s quantum of action. The link between engineering thermodynamics and quantum theory is not spurious and each of our current formulations helps us develop our understanding of the other. Both the ET and quantum theory understandings of thermodynamic phenomena, as essentially dissymmetric (viz. embracing complementary), entail that there must be an irreducible, cumulative historical, qualitatively emergent, aspect of reality.
Keywords
foundations of thermodynamics; Boltzmann vs. Carnot; engineering thermodynamics; quantum thermodynamics; Principle of Least Action; complementarity; Maupertuis; Lazare Carnot
Subject
Physical Sciences, Quantum Science and Technology
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
