Something I sent to another discussion list (complexity-l) but which may be curious for this group as well.

"Stanley N. Salthe" wrote:
> . Furthermore, the Second Law may be the most basic law of
> nature

This most basic law of nature originates from a logical mistake made by Clausius and Kelvin. Initially, Carnot made a pefect implication from the following antecedent to the following consequent:

ANTECEDENT: Heat is an indestructible substance ("calorique").
CONSEQUENT: All reversible machines working between two given temperatures have the SAME efficiency.

In a normal science, if the antecedent is shown to be wrong, the consequent is abandoned. (This is not an obligatory step, but if not taken, the consequent remains in the form of myth). Clausius and Kelvin did not do so. They rejected the antecedent (heat is NOT an indestructible substance) but preserved the consequent. That's how the saga began.

Pentcho