Jump to content

Talk:Maxwell's demon

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TheCampaignForRealPhysics (talk | contribs) at 07:10, 30 April 2019 (Added reference to consider ~~~~). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

WikiProject iconPhysics C‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconPhilosophy: Science C‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Philosophy of science


"Feynman's thought experiment"

The first sentence of the 'Experimental work' section refers to "Feynman's thought experiment". Should 'Feynman' read 'Maxwell', here, or is this a reference to some other thought experiment by Feynman? If the latter, it ought to be described. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:31, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's a reference to Feynman's Brownian ratchet. Yeah, that term should be in there. Put it in. --ChetvornoTALK 17:12, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That makes more sense. Thanks. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:08, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Biological systems

Happens in biology all the time, eg, gate proteins. And of course, the 2nd Law is never violated. 213.1.8.114 (talk) 02:03, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Computer Daemons

The unsourced claim that computing daemons are named after Maxwell's demon is simply wrong. I am removing it. If anyone feels strongly enough to try to restore it, please find a citation. 69.255.61.212 (talk) 22:43, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've copied over a source from Daemon (computing) which supports the assertion. clpo13(talk) 22:55, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Further explanation of Experiment

The explanation does not account for the input of work required to open and close the door and how this impacts the entropy of the system. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.0.252.207 (talk) 23:07, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A good reference to work in

Has anyone considered this reference produced by the Springer? "Challenges to the Second Law of Thermodynamics: Theory and Experiment" by Vladislav Cápek, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic and Daniel P. Sheehan, University of San Diego, California, U.S.A. The front page and other relevant references can be found here: http://webspace.qmul.ac.uk/rocornwall/Thermo.htm