In 1850 Rudolph Clausius obtained the conclusion "All heat engines
working between the same two temperatures have the same maximal
efficiency":

http://web.lemoyne.edu/~giunta/Clausius.html
http://www.mdpi.org/lin/clausius/clausius.htm

Clausius was forced to use an invalid argument for reasons described
he

http://www.wbabin.net/valev/valev4.htm

Eventually Clausius conclusion took the form "Perpetuum mobile of the
second kind is impossible" suggesting that those who would try to test
the dogma are just as mad as those trying to extract energy out of
nothing.

Since Clausius argument is invalid, honesty requires that the negation
of the conclusion, "Heat engines working between the same two
temperatures may have different maximal efficiencies", be regarded as a
full-blooded hypothesis able to generate an alternative thermodynamics.
Dying physics would not be rescued (if rescuing is possible at all)
without this step.

Similarly, dying physics would not be rescued without the eradication
of Einstein's false second postulate and its miraculous corollaries:

http://blogs.physicstoday.org/newspi...nfidelity.html
http://blogs.physicstoday.org/newspi...n_reverse.html
http://blogs.physicstoday.org/newspi..._crossroa.html
http://blogs.physicstoday.org/newspi...cs_is_too.html

Pentcho Valev

Valev has a post with the title "RESTORING HONESTY IN SCIENCE"??????

To quote hansen:

ha
hahahaha
hahahahahahahah
hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Good one, Valev. Keep us entertained.