On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 12:51 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Mon, 15 Apr 2013 21:56:56 -0400: > Hi, > [snip] > >CoE would still apply in this case > >the total energy before = total energy after > >energy the substance = energy of substance + energy of escaping > neutrinos. > > > >A cooling substance that violated CoE wouldn't be producing enough > >particles or radiation to balance the equation. > > > >Harry > > It would just produce less as it cooled down, until it ended up at absolute > zero, or at a temperature where the energy lost through neutrino production > matched the heat leaking in through the container. > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > > Yes, it is a problem in non-equilibrium thermodynamics. The rate of particle emission should be commensurate with the rate of cooling according to CoE.
Interestingly, if the rate of cooling is greater than what would be expected based on the rate of particle emission that would imply energy is being _destroyed_. On the other hand, if the rate of cooling is less than what would be expected based on the rate of particle emission that would mean energy is being _created_. I am glad you brought this up, because it shows that energy production or creation does not always have to be associated with a rise in temperature. harrry
