Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
{{Topic
|Subject=The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015)
|Question=Is the second law a tautology, i.e. can it ''in principle'' be violated?
|Topic Type=Descriptive
|Subfield=
|Heritable=
|Question Text Formula=
|Question Title Formula=
|Question=
|Question Title=
|Predicate=is tautological
|Object Type=
|Object Value True=
|Object Value False=
|Object Class=
|Object Enum Values=
|Object Regexp=
|Single Answer Text Formula=
|Multiple Answers Text Formula=
|Answer Title Formula=
|Description=As any law, the second law attempts to forbid certain courses of action, for otherwise it would lack any empirical content and would be a tautology. However, it is not quite clear whether the law in its current formulation can be contradicted by any conceivable situation. So the question is whether the law is tautological or non-tautological, i.e. whether there are circumstances (perhaps the collapse of the society which contains the scientific community) under which the second law can in principle be violated?
|Authors List=Rory Harder
|Formulated Year=2013
|Academic Events=Scientonomy Seminar 2013
|Prehistory=
|History=
|Current View=
|Parent Topic=Mechanism of Theory Acceptance
|Authors ListPage Status=Rory Harder,Needs Editing|Formulated YearEditor Notes=2013|Academic Events=Scientonomy Seminar 2013,
}}
{{Acceptance Record
|Acceptance Indicators=This was when the community first accepted an answer to this question. [[The Second Law is a Tautology (Barseghyan-2015)]], which indicates that the question itself is legitimate.
|Still Accepted=Yes
|Accepted Until Era=
|Accepted Until Year=
|Accepted Until Month=
|Accepted Until Day=
|Accepted Until Approximate=No
|Rejection Indicators=
}}

Navigation menu