🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mar 2, 5:20 am, "zzbun...@netscape.net" <zzbun...@netscape.net>
wrote:
> On Mar 2, 2:39 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >http://www.beilstein-institut.de/bozen2004/proceedings/CornishBowden/...
> > 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."
>
>    Well, many of them understand the economics of entropy
>    well enough, but not the materials of entropy. Which is why robots,
>    lasers, and computers were developed for the wanks.
>
>
>
>
>
> >http://www.worldscibooks.com/popsci/etextbook/6261/6261_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
> > pva...@yahoo.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Pencho, have you actually ever completed and passed a course on
elementary thermodynamics?

No, I assume you haven't.

Harry C.