John, I think you are misreading Stan’s comments a little. [Stan: please correct me if I am wrong about that.] I think it would be fair to say that older car engines were less well fit "between the energy gradient and the system attempting to utilize it”. Another way of saying this is that the older car engine mechanism was less efficient in dissipating that gradient, which translated into low gas mileage. Those engines had to work harder in delivering the same outcome (say driving 1 mile) than the newer, more efficient engines. The capacity of the new engines to work harder than old engines does not mean they work harder to produce the same outcome. I don’t see the flaw in saying that working harder to achieve a constant outcome degrades more energy. Clever design and selection can indeed utilize information to yield greater efficiencies, which can only approach the limit imposed by the 2nd law. It looks to me like you and Stan are really in agreement here. Am I missing something?
Cheers, Guy On Sep 4, 2014, at 1:06 PM, John Collier <colli...@ukzn.ac.za<mailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za>> wrote: S: In decline in the actual material world that we inhabit. That is, the local world -- the world of input and dissipation. I think the information problem may be advanced if we try to explain why the energy efficiency of any work is so poor, and gets worse the harder we work. This is the key local phenomenon that needs to be understood. JC: Information can be used to improve efficiency. SS: That is not same question. Which is: Why is any work constitutively poor in energy efficiency? I wrote a little essay ( Entropy: what does it really mean? General Systems Bulletin 32:5-12.) suggesting that it results from a lack of fittingness between energy gradient and the system attempting to utilize it -- that is, that it is an information problem. Actually, it is part of the same question. As I have said many times, you trivialize the idea of maximum entropy production if you relativize it to all constraints. Howard has made this sort of point over and over as well. But you are right that the important factor is an information problem. I was once asked to referee a paper that argued that we could get around 2nd law degradation by using the exhaust heat in a clever way, and keep doing this ad infinitum. I pointed out (sarcastically) that we could do this, but only if we could make smaller and smaller people to use the energy (apologies to Kurt Vonnegut). We get much more work out of gasoline engines than we used to, even though most are smaller and work harder. So, no, it is not in general true that harder work degrades more energy. Clever design (and selection) can make a difference that is more significant. John _______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es<mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
