A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

CLAUSIUS ZOMBIE WORLD IS MORE FUNDAMENTAL THAN EINSTEIN ZOMBIE WORLD



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 6th 08, 11:32 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,fr.sci.physique,fr.sci.astrophysique,sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default CLAUSIUS ZOMBIE WORLD IS MORE FUNDAMENTAL THAN EINSTEIN ZOMBIE WORLD

http://www.physorg.com/news139830010.html
"As humans, we have a very intuitive concept of time, and of the
differences between the past, present, and future. But, as scientists
Edward Feng of the University of California, Berkeley, and Gavin
Crooks of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory point out, science
does not provide a clear definition of time. “In our everyday lives we
have the sense that time flows inexorably from the past into the
future; water flows downhill; mountains erode; we are born, grow old,
and die; we anticipate the future but remember the past,” the
scientists write in a recent study in Physical Review Letters. “Yet
almost all of the fundamental theories of physics – classical
mechanics, electrodynamics, quantum mechanics, general relativity, and
so on – are symmetric with respect to time reversal. “The only
fundamental theory that picks out a preferred direction of time is the
second law of thermodynamics, which asserts that the entropy of the
Universe increases as time flows toward the future. This provides an
orientation, or arrow of time, and it is generally believed that all
other time asymmetries, such as our sense that future and past are
different, are a direct consequence of this thermodynamic arrow.”

http://www.beilstein-institut.de/boz...nishBowden.htm
Athel Cornish-Bowden: "The concept of entropy was introduced to
thermodynamics by Clausius, who deliberately chose an obscure term for
it, wanting a word based on Greek roots that would sound similar to
"energy". In this way he hoped to have a word that would mean the same
to everyone regardless of their language, and, as Cooper [2] remarked,
he succeeded in this way in finding a word that meant the same to
everyone: NOTHING. From the beginning it proved a very difficult
concept for other thermodynamicists, even including such accomplished
mathematicians as Kelvin and Maxwell; Kelvin, indeed, despite his own
major contributions to the subject, never appreciated the idea of
entropy [3]. The difficulties that Clausius created have continued to
the present day, with the result that a fundamental idea that is
absolutely necessary for understanding the theory of chemical
equilibria continues to give trouble, not only to students but also to
scientists who need the concept for their work."

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/
Jos Uffink: "The historian of science and mathematician Truesdell made
a detailed study of the historical development of thermodynamics in
the period 1822-1854. He characterises the theory, even in its present
state, as 'a dismal swamp of obscurity' (1980, p. 6) and 'a prime
example to show that physicists are not exempt from the madness of
crowds' (ibid. p. 8) ...Clausius' verbal statement of the second law
makes no sense...All that remains is a Mosaic prohibition; a century
of philosophers and journalists have acclaimed this commandment; a
century of mathematicians have shuddered and averted their eyes from
the unclean... Seven times in the past thirty years have I tried to
follow the argument Clausius offers... and seven times has it blanked
and gravelled me... I cannot explain what I cannot understand....This
summary leads to the question whether it is fruitful to see
irreversibility or time-asymmetry as the essence of the second law. Is
it not more straightforward, in view of the unargued statements of
Kelvin, the bold claims of Clausius and the strained attempts of
Planck, to give up this idea? I believe that Ehrenfest-Afanassjewa was
right in her verdict that the discussion about the arrow of time as
expressed in the second law of the thermodynamics is actually a RED
HERRING."

http://www.worldscibooks.com/popsci/...61_preface.pdf
Arieh Ben-Naim: "I waited patiently to ask something, though I was not
sure what the question would be. What is this thing called entropy and
why does it always increase? Is it something we can see, touch or feel
with any of our senses? Upon finishing her exposition, the lecturer
interjected, “If you do not understand the Second Law, do not be
discouraged. You are in good company. You will not be able to
understand it at this stage, but you will understand it when you study
statistical thermodynamics next year.”.....Not only do we not know the
source which supplies the fuel for the ever-increasing entropy, but no
source is permitted, in principle, no feeding mechanism and no
provision for any supplies of anything from the outside. Besides, how
is it that “structure” and “order” have crept into the discussion of
entropy, a concept that was defined in terms of heat and
temperature?......I taught thermodynamics and statistical mechanics
for many years. During those years, I came to realize that the mystery
associated with the Second Law can never be removed within classical
thermodynamics......I believe that the turning point in my own
understanding of entropy, hence also in my ability to explain it to my
students came when I was writing an article.....Once the haze
dissipated, everything became crystal clear. Not only clear, but in
fact obvious; entropy’s behavior which was once quite difficult to
understand, was reduced to a simple matter of common sense. Moreover,
I suddenly realized that one does not need to know any statistical
mechanics to understand the Second Law. This might sound
contradictory, having just claimed that statistical mechanics harbors
the clues to understanding the Second Law...."

http://www.worldscibooks.com/chemistry/6469.html
Arieh Ben-Naim: "A FAREWELL TO ENTROPY. The principal message of this
book is that thermodynamics and statistical mechanics will benefit
from replacing the unfortunate, misleading and mysterious term
“entropy” with a more familiar, meaningful and appropriate term...."

Pentcho Valev

  #2  
Old September 6th 08, 12:09 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,fr.sci.physique,fr.sci.astrophysique,sci.astro
kduc[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default CLAUSIUS ZOMBIE WORLD IS MORE FUNDAMENTAL THAN EINSTEIN ZOMBIEWORLD

Pentcho Valev a écrit :

[ ... ]
Pentcho Valev


Voir surtout cela :

http://bip.cnrs-mrs.fr/bip10/valevfaq.htm

--
kd
  #3  
Old September 6th 08, 12:35 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,fr.sci.physique,fr.sci.astrophysique,sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default CLAUSIUS ZOMBIE WORLD IS MORE FUNDAMENTAL THAN EINSTEIN ZOMBIEWORLD

On Sep 6, 1:09*pm, kduc wrote:
Pentcho Valev a écrit :

[ ... ]
Pentcho Valev


Voir surtout cela :

http://bip.cnrs-mrs.fr/bip10/valevfaq.htm


Mais je t'ai expliqué déjà: mon biographe Athel Cornish-Bowden (un
grand Maître anglais qui dirige la science française d'une manière
extraordinaire) a évolué et maintenant agit comme mon collaborateur:

http://www.beilstein-institut.de/boz...nishBowden.htm
Athel Cornish-Bowden: "The concept of entropy was introduced to
thermodynamics by Clausius, who deliberately chose an obscure term for
it, wanting a word based on Greek roots that would sound similar to
"energy". In this way he hoped to have a word that would mean the same
to everyone regardless of their language, and, as Cooper [2] remarked,
he succeeded in this way in finding a word that meant the same to
everyone: NOTHING. From the beginning it proved a very difficult
concept for other thermodynamicists, even including such accomplished
mathematicians as Kelvin and Maxwell; Kelvin, indeed, despite his own
major contributions to the subject, never appreciated the idea of
entropy [3]. The difficulties that Clausius created have continued to
the present day, with the result that a fundamental idea that is
absolutely necessary for understanding the theory of chemical
equilibria continues to give trouble, not only to students but also to
scientists who need the concept for their work."

Pentcho Valev

  #4  
Old September 6th 08, 01:28 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,fr.sci.physique,fr.sci.astrophysique,sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default CLAUSIUS ZOMBIE WORLD IS MORE FUNDAMENTAL THAN EINSTEIN ZOMBIEWORLD

On Sep 6, 1:53*pm, "mogi77" wrote:
Can enthropy be explained by the assumption that each new moment in time
consists of more space (or particularly space quanta) which give more
possibilities to the events?


The concept of entropy or, more precisely, the statement that entropy
always increases, was DEDUCED by Clausius. That is, there were
premises, explicit or implicit, true or false, and then there was the
deduction from the premises to the conclusion, valid or invalid. All
this should be verified very carefully before any additional
explanation of the entropy is advanced. The verification has already
started but unfortunately Clausius zombie world sees no reason why it
should be continued:

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/
p.39: Jos Uffink: "A more important objection, it seems to me, is that
Clausius bases his conclusion that the entropy increases in a nicht
umkehrbar [irreversible] process on the assumption that such a process
can be closed by an umkehrbar [reversible] process to become a cycle.
This is essential for the definition of the entropy difference between
the initial and final states. But the assumption is far from obvious
for a system more complex than an ideal gas, or for states far from
equilibrium, or for processes other than the simple exchange of heat
and work."

Pentcho Valev

  #5  
Old September 12th 08, 02:51 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,fr.sci.physique,fr.sci.astrophysique,sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default CLAUSIUS ZOMBIE WORLD IS MORE FUNDAMENTAL THAN EINSTEIN ZOMBIEWORLD

Silly Einsteinians exploit Clausius idiocies:

http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/513/
"In spite of its old age, the Second Law of Thermodynamics “is alive
and kicking,” says Max Tegmark, stimulating research on “really,
really big puzzles.” In Tegmark’s case, “big” encompasses the cosmos,
and investigating the entropy of the universe offers one path into
understanding “how we started out.” Tegmark frames his talk with
paradoxical questions: Why is entropy so low, and why is entropy so
high? The first question is “crucial to understanding the arrow of
time,”...."

http://www.2physics.com/2007/06/symm...lack-hole.html
"Symmetries, Horizons, and Black Hole Entropy. [This is an invited
article from Prof. Steve Carlip who received this year's Gravity
Research Foundation award for his essay on this topic. The award-
winning essay will be published in future issue of General Relativity
and Gravitation and International Journal of Modern Physics D.] Drop a
box of hot gas into a black hole. The initial state is gas plus a
black hole; the final state is a slightly larger black hole, and
nothing else. If the second law of thermodynamics -- which requires
that entropy never decrease -- is to hold, the final black hole had
better have enough entropy to account for the entropy of the gas it
swallowed up."

http://www.hawking.org.uk/text/physics/entropy.html
Stephen Hawking: "The first indication of a connection between black
holes and entropy, came in 1970, with my discovery that the area of
the horizon of a black hole, always increased. There was an obvious
analogy with the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which states that
entropy always increases."

The truth:

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/
Jos Uffink: "On many occasions Clausius was criticised by his
contemporaries. I do not know if, in his own time, he was criticised
in particular for his famous formulation of the second law as the
increase of the entropy of the universe. However, Kuhn (1978, pp.
13-15, p. 260) has pointed out the remarkable fact that in the book
(Clausius 1876) he eventually composed from his collected articles,
every reference to the entropy of the universe and even to the idea
that entropy never decreases in irreversible processes in
adiabatically isolated systems is deleted! (...) This summary leads to
the question whether it is fruitful to see irreversibility or time-
asymmetry as the essence of the second law. Is it not more
straightforward, in view of the unargued statements of Kelvin, the
bold claims of Clausius and the strained attempts of Planck, to give
up this idea? I believe that Ehrenfest-Afanassjewa was right in her
verdict that the discussion about the arrow of time as expressed in
the second law of the thermodynamics is actually a RED HERRING."

Pentcho Valev

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
TRUTH IN EINSTEIN ZOMBIE WORLD Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 4 August 16th 08 05:49 PM
INTROSPECTION IN EINSTEIN ZOMBIE WORLD Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 3 October 23rd 07 07:04 AM
WHY EINSTEIN WORLD IS A ZOMBIE WORLD Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 4 September 25th 07 10:06 AM
Albert Einstein, the Rational World and the Zombie World brian a m stuckless Policy 0 October 25th 05 09:48 PM
Albert Einstein, the Rational World and the Zombie World brian a m stuckless Astronomy Misc 0 October 25th 05 09:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.