Does not change a thing. The point is: reviewing the text talking about thermodynamics I have found and you agreed that the text has no clue about T-cs.. And it is not the only one article of such type.
I have already told you, there have been many attempts to make PMM and/or to provide a theoretical base for it, just calculating Entropy. They include PMMs working from energy of earth, sun etc., and just mathematical calculations and everything you can imagine. . Some of those calculations have been done by people whose knowledge well exceeds my rudimental knowledge of T-cs and math. As well a number of attempts have been made to disprove Einstein. I am not sure about Einstein, but in T-cs there is hardly a chance for you to be reviewed by peers. T-cs just walks away. It is a law of T-cs – don’t argue, just walk away. I am not joking- this is what the old man told me – we walk away.
It is like you would prove --- gravity laws are not valid because you don’t see them in outer space. Who would be arguing? T-cs just walks away. Any disprove of PMM would lead to invention of another PMM…. This is all the meaning of rejecting PMM without looking at it since 17**. T-cs is a quite unique science. Therefore ToE cannot be disproved, just by submitting PMM to T-cs. Who would be arguing? Fortunately for you all exact sciences confirm to T-cs. In Quantum mechanics the probability of PMM (decrease of En (S) in 2nd law meaning) is 50/50 which makes the existence of PMM =0 in indefinite number of tries. So, you may be sure nobody would be taking time to review your finding stating otherwise. T-cs does not depend on time when things happen. It is a universal law of the universe before your existence and after your existence in all places of the universe for all systems.
Your article represented the snowflake a as a complex system , I showed and you saw a snowflake was not more complex than liquid, and the more, gaseous state of the same matter – and now I am telling you: it is so throughout all Entropy (S) charts and tables, for all systems. And even from common sense point of view – you have a chance to draw a snowflake – but what is a chance for you to make a drawing of the vapor it turns into when it absorbs energy=heat?
Quote from an article which has no relation to ToE-ID fight:
One of the problems with studying the mechanisms and history of complex systems is the
lack of a working definition of complexity. …. Complexity depends on the observer.
99% of people looking at a snowflake would accept that it is a complex structure. 99% of real, not fake scientists would ask: in relation to what, what is the point you are looking at the snowflake from, what are your working definitions, what is your zero mark, what is grading of your tape measure, what are parameters you are accepting, what is the system of coordinates. Your definitions of scientific method are missing this part of science ( 0, system of coordinates, universal axioms, tape measure, parameters) in order to include ToE as a science.
So, your observations would be your personal impressions and your ability to convince other people that your personal impressions are common for them too.
Look at any living organism, and take yourself as an example. In order to exist you have to eat and drink – your consume calories, or chemicals to split them into calories, so all in all it is calories. Calories are a measure of heat/energy. Then WHATEVER YOU DO you're just burnimg calories; and then you sh/t the rest of calories out. Even when you think and have an idea, or experience emotions, - you observe chemical/electrical processes in your nervous system as a flow/transformation of energy provided by your food. Tell me what am I missing, what else you are doing besides taking energy, exchanging energy with surroundings, transforming energy in movements, thinking, ideas = chemical, electrical and mechanical forms of energy. You do nothing else. Not even a little thing is an exclusion. Then, as a prove that you are not a PMM, you die, sun makes you dry out, water makes you disintegrate, no food can revive you, you turn into a fossil. Therefore T’cs is a scientific way of describing you on the earth and in the universe. T-cs as well as other exact sciences has no emotions looking at you and does not differentiate you from a machine.
You are a machine, my friend. Law of thermodynamics had been known well before Darwin. Darwin started talking about all the machines with no attempt to apply the scientific method of the description of the machines. He had no axioms, no 0 point, and no tape measure. Just his own impressions. Which made him a genius. It never happened to any other science. Mendeleyev arranged chemicals in the table according to their atomic weights, so he used weights as a tape measure, not his own impressions, -- as well as definitions of atoms and other axioms and parameters of chemistry. Each science has a ‘’0”” point where it start. Math starts from + and – and it all can be taken apart down to + and -. “∫” is a sum. Geometry starts from a dot and a line. T-cs starts from P, T and V. Your science starts from nowhere, thus it also violates the 1st law of T-cswhich says nothing comes from nowhere and nothing goes nowhere, or, in another reading: E=MC^2, - even Einstein had to confirm to T-cs. In order to survive you first have to confirm to Thermodynamics; it does not matter whether you are an atheist or a believer , Darwin or Einstein – first of all and all in all you are a machine. And you are not a Perpetual Mobile.
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jcdverha/scijokes/2_18.html
