Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
{{Topic|Subject=#REDIRECT [[Tautological Status of The Second Law (BarseghyanPatton-2015)|Topic Type=Descriptive|Subfield=|Heritable=No|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 nonOvergaard-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|Page Status=Needs Editing|Editor Notes=}}{{Acceptance Record|Community=Community:Scientonomy|Accepted From Era=CE|Accepted From Year=2016|Accepted From Month=January|Accepted From Day=1|Accepted From Approximate=No|Acceptance Indicators=This was when the community first accepted an answer to this question. [[The Second Law is a Tautology (Barseghyan-20152017)]], 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