3 ms·
I voted you up for truth. But... don't discount the profound disappointment that a headline like that generates in those of us who do know how a microwave work
by Amadou 13y ago
I voted you up for truth.
But... don't discount the profound disappointment that a headline like that generates in those of us who do know how a microwave works. We were teased with the idea of learning something we thought would alter our understanding of the universe -- some sort of microwave version of the peltier effect[1] -- only to find out it was something as pedestrian as poetic license.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoelectric_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoelectric_effect
- waps 13y agoThose who know physics would hopefully know that a cooling microwave would be a blatant violation of the second law of thermodynamics.
- jsilence 13y agoIn soviet russia... SCNR
- Amadou 13y agoOddly enough, your response is basically the same sort of overly-narrow literalism that gojomo was complaining about, just from the other direction.
- serf 13y agoNo, it's not. "reverse microwave" is correct in a sense, because as gojomo pointed out, the author meant it as a way to convey the concept of "rapid-heating appliance". "You can't do x because of thermodynamics" actually was incorrect, and didn't take into account multiple specific instances which show that closed systems can create such results.
- cookingrobot 13y agoNo it wouldn't - as long as the device, target and environment heat up as a whole. For ex, laser cooling where a laser reflects off a surface with more energy than it started with.