Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
Posted By: AtomWell done joshs, you promptly showed that you are a moron.And you have demonstrated this by refuting what position of mine? JAQ'ing off is not a counter argument.
Posted By: QuantenFirstly as we went over this with PL (and possibly PJH) second law applies only for macroscopic system (if I recall correctly the limit being somewhere around an isolated system of a billion atom, above the 2nd law being verified to many significant digits, the reason being obvious why this so for a statistical empirical law). What PJH propose are definitively not capturing system of less a few billion atom, so here is your flawYes, it was discussed at length back on the old forum. The whackado concept is that a work function that is low enough at a particular temperature to result in electrons escaping the solid means that they spin-off into space. A certain number will if and only if the surrounding space is at a lower temperature than the solid. Miracle of miracles emission removes heat, and reduces temperature of the solid. At constant temperature the equilibrium condition gives rise to a static charge distribution. Absent an accelerating voltage, or temperature gradient, the work function of the material and the temperature determine the average distribution of charge in the vicinity of the solid's surface. It does not give rise to a static current away from the solid's surface.
...
For conductor I darkly remember capture or emission has the same energy (kinetic energy only change possible cross section probability of capture). But I could be wrong, and I will plainly admit I have no desire to check it, so feel free to correct me.
Posted By: overconfidentizzat you Phil?It would seem so.
Posted By: AtomSurrounding space is at a lower temperature than the solid?
That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.