The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Entropy. / My opinion /.  (Read 6937 times)

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Entropy. / My opinion /.
« on: 30/03/2008 13:36:01 »
Entropy. / My opinion /.
1.
Henry Poincare  named the conception of "entropy "
as a " surprising abstract ".
2.
 L. Landau (Dau) wrote:
" A question about the physical basis of the
entropy monotonous  increasing law remains open ". 
3.
The famous mathematician  John von Neumann said to
"the father of information theory" Claude Shannon:
 " Name it "entropy"  then in discussions
 you will receive solid advantage, because
nobody knows, what "entropy"  basically is ".
=============..
1.
Between 1850 - 1865 Rudolf Clausius published a paper
 in which  he called " The energy conservation law" as
 " The first law  of  thermodynamics". But in our nature the
 heat always flows  from the higher temperature to the
 lower one and never back.  In our everyday life we don't see
 the heat itself rises from cold to hot. So, it seemed  that
 in thermodynamics " The energy  conservation law"
wasn’t  kept, this law was broken. But Clausius had another
opinion. He thought: I know people believe  that this process is
irreversible, but I am sure that " The energy conservation  law"
 is universal law and it must be correct also for thermodynamic
process. So, how can I save this law ?
Probably, in the thermodynamic process  there is something
 that we don't  know. Maybe, there is some degradation
 of the total energy in the system which never disappears .
Perhaps, there is some non-useful heat,  some unseen process ,
some unknown  dark energy , some  another form of potential
 energy/heat itself which can  transform  heat  from the cold
 body to the warm one. I will call  this conception as " entropy"
 and as it is not a law  I take it as " The second  principle
 of thermodynamics " which says that " the entropy of an isolated
system always increases ". Another version: " No process is possible
 in which the  only result is the transfer   of heat from a hotter to a
colder body.  It is possible some reversible process which is
 unknown now ."
2.
Between 1870 - 1880  Ludwig Boltzmann said:
" Clausius is right. But I can add more to his entropy conception.
First.
According to Classic physics when an isolated thermodynamic
 system comes to a thermal equilibrium all particles stop their
 moving. From one hand it is correct. But the system cannot be
 at thermal equilibrium (in the state of death) all the time.
 The situation in the system must change.
Therefore I say  that at the thermal equilibrium  the entropy
(some unknown dark/potential energy ) of the system will
reach maximum and as a result , the thermal  equilibrium
 of the system will change.
Second.
I don't know how exactly  the  thermal  equilibrium of the system
 changes. But I can give  probabilistic / statistical interpretation
of this changing process.  I can write " The second principle of
 thermodynamics" by a formula: S= k log W and this formula
says:" the entropy of the system is the collective result of
mechanical motions of all the particles (k)."
I will call it as " The second law of Thermodynamics."
3
In 1900 Max Planck said:
Clausius and Boltzmann are both right.
But all my life I worked almost exclusively on problems
 related to thermodynamics. And I am sure that the " The second
 law of Thermodynamics" , concerning entropy, is deeper and it
 says more than is generally accepted. I am sure the Boltzmann's
probabilistic /statistical version of "The second law of
Thermodynamics "  is not  completed, is not final.
Please, look at the graph of the radiation curves of the " black body".
They are very similar to those curves which are calculated
by Maxwell for the velocity (i.e. energy)  distribution of gas
molecules in a closed container. Could this black body radiation
problem be studied in the same way as Maxwell's ideal gas....
...electromagnetic waves ? This problem of connection  between
radiation of black body and Maxwell's Electrodynamics theory
doesn't give me peace. Maxwell's theory can tell everything
about the emission, absorption and propagation of the radiation,
 but nothing about the energy distribution at thermal
equilibrium. What to do? How to be ?
After trying every possible approach using traditional
classical applications of the laws of thermodynamics
I was desperated. And I was forced to consider that the
relation between entropy, Boltzmann's  probability version
and Maxwell's theory  is possible to solve by suggestion ,
 that  energy is radiated and absorbed with discrete
  individual  quanta particle (E= hv). So, now I must write
 " The second law of Thermodynamics " by formula:
                          hv = k log W.
But I was so surprised and sceptical of such interpretation  the
 entropy  that I spent years trying to explain this result
in another , less revolutionary way. It was difficult for me
 to accept this formula and to understand it essence .
It was hard for me to believe in my own discovery.
 ==================..
My conclusion.
How to understand this formula?
Which process does formula (hv = k logW ) describe ?
1.
In 1877  Boltzmann suggested that the energy/mass state
of a physical system (of ideal gas ) could be discreted.
 This idea was written with formula: R/N=k. It means:
 there are particles with energy/mass state (k) in physical
system of ideal gas  . They dont move, they are in the
 state of rest.
2.
 In 1900 Planck followed Boltzmann's  method of dividing.
Planck suggested that energy was radiated and absorbed
with  discrete "energy elements" - " quantum of energy"-
- " Planck's action constant"- (h) . Its energy is: E=hv.
3.
In which reference frame does this process take place?
In thermodynamical reference frame of ideal gas and
black body (Laue called this model as Kirchhoff,s vacuum).
Now it is considered that these models  are abstract ones which
do not exist in nature. On my opinion  these models explain
  the situation in the real Vacuum (T=0K) very well.
4.
 For my opinion the formula (hv = k logW ) says:
a)
The reason of " entropy" , the source of thermal equilibrium's
fluctuation , the source of Vacuum fluctuation is an action of
the particle /electron, which  has energy: E = hv.
b)
The process of Vacuum fluctuation depends on collective
motions of all particles (k) and will be successful if enough
 statistical  quantity of Boltzmann's  particles ( k logW)
 surround the electron.
c)
Which process does the formula (hv = k logW ) say about ?
This formula explains the beginning conditions of gravitation,
the beginning conditions of star formation.
( The article of star formation is posted on this site.)
d)
One physicist  said :" The entropy is only a shadow of energy“.
Maybe now somebody can understand  why  entropy is a shadow.
And maybe now somebody will understand why
" The  Law of conservation  and transformation of energy"
 is also correct for thermodynamic system.
===========..
P.S.
 It took me only two month to write this brief article.
Plus about three years searching for the key of entropy problem.
Plus about twenty-three years trying to understand the essence
of physical laws and formulas.
==============.. 
  Best wishes.


 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8648
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Entropy. / My opinion /.
« Reply #1 on: 30/03/2008 14:18:00 »
"A question about the physical basis of the
entropy monotonous  increasing law remains open "
Feel free to tell us what question.

"nobody knows, what "entropy"  basically is "
It's k ln (w)
Ask the late Proffessor Boltzman- OK He's dead, but it is written on his tombstone.

"Rudolf Clausius published a paper
 in which  he called " The energy conservation law" as
 " The first law  of  thermodynamics". But in our nature the
 heat always flows  from the higher temperature to the
 lower one and never back.  In our everyday life we don't see
 the heat itself rises from cold to hot. So, it seemed  that
 in thermodynamics " The energy  conservation law"
wasn’t  kept, this law was broken."
No the law of conservation of energy hasn't nbeen broken at all. Some energy has moved from the hot thing to the cold one The total is still the same.


"P.S.
 It took me only two month to write this brief article."
It shows.


 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Entropy. / My opinion /.
« Reply #2 on: 05/04/2008 12:35:31 »
Entropy. / My opinion./  One comment.
=================================
# [A law] is more impressive the greater the simplicity of its
premises, the more different are the kinds of things it relates, and
the more extended its range of applicability. Therefore, the deep
impression which classical thermodynamics made on me. It is the only
physical theory of universal content, which I am convinced, that
within the framework of applicability of its basic concepts will never
be overthrown.

Albert Einstein, quoted in M.J. Klein, Thermodynamics in Einstein's
Universe, in Science, 157 (1967), p. 509.

# The law that entropy always increases -- the second law of
thermodynamics -- holds I think, the supreme position among the laws
of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the
universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations - then so much
worse for Maxwell equations. If it is found to be contradicted by
observation - well these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes.
But if your theory is found to be against the second law of
Thermodynamics, I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to
collapse in deepest humiliation.

Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington, in The Nature of the Physical World.
Maxmillan, New York, 1948, p. 74.

As a father of objective information physics your painstaking analysis
of entropy has been a great torment to me. It took you three months
and a lifetime to figure it out and it has been my obsession as well.

Planck resented that entropy could not be taken as a first principle
of the universe and had to eat the fact that is is fully accounted for
by statistical emergence. But the root of his consternation was, I
believe, in that the equation hv = k log W energy and entropy are
shown to be equivalent despite the obvious contradiction.

there is no contradiction that as the internal energy of a system
increases, so does the entropy. The contradiction lies in the basic
principles, energy is considered the ability to do work, and entropy
is the loss of the ability to do work. clearly they must be opposite,
they cannot be the same.

There is a similar discrepancy in Shannon, calling the measure of
information entropy (S) as it echoed the equation, S = k log W. This
issue is, in my view, one of the two good reasons why nobody would
erase "energy=information " from the board as the Santa Fe Institute
for many years. Clearly entropy is the loss of useful information.
Information cannot be the loss of information. They must be opposite.

In classical philosophy this is an undecidable problem, induction does
not serve us, thus our consternation. Static truth cannot explain the
problem. We are forced to resort to dynamical logic to discover the
truth.

I explain this in terms of the information cycle. In dynamical
systems order emerges from a disordered substrate. Information
increases as order emerges. Once the order becomes so complicated
that if is incomprehensible, it becomes disorder relatively in the big
picture and just noise from which simple order emerges becoming more
complex until is becomes noise again.

My issue with hv = k log W is the quantization that it represents,
clearly it is the discrete integer increments of energy that prevents
the ultraviolet catastrophe and accounts for observed spectra. But
most all authors write this a nhv, or an integer n, times Planks
constant, times the frequency. And while the value is clearly very
small why should it be exactly h in satisfaction of human units of
measurement?

It seems to me that nature clearly contradicts the notion that energy
is only present in hv increments. All energy is shown accurately to
be determined by the change in momentum state. We know momentum
states only exist in integer multiples of hbar, h/2pi, the difference
in momentum between any two states. Since double the momentum is four
times the energy, the possible energies are not discrete by a constant
value, but increase in granularity to a singularity at the Plank
energy.

Furthermore, given hbar, h/2pi increments in momentum, and that hbar
represents a single bit of measurable information in the quantum, it
is the natural unit of entropy for physical systems.

It may take me another lifetime to fully comprehend hv = k log W as
each week it offers a new revelation. The anthropic principle is
exhibited for our existence itself, by the simple fact, that pi can
only be approximated and that space time systems in general tend to hv
= k log W, the impossibility of which, insures our increasing
diversity, and negative entropy in our realm, contrernating not only
the spirits of Einstein and Eddington but also that of Aristotle and
Plato.

The simple truth is that nature herself is evidence of the violation
of the second law and Philosophy itself can do nothing but to collapse
in deepest humiliation as the spirit of Socrates laughs, we do not
know what we think we know.

Jim
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8648
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Entropy. / My opinion /.
« Reply #3 on: 05/04/2008 17:47:30 »
"The simple truth is that nature herself is evidence of the violation
of the second law"
No it's not.
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Entropy. / My opinion /.
« Reply #4 on: 06/04/2008 10:51:26 »
"The simple truth is that nature herself is evidence of the violation
of the second law"
No it's not.
==========================
# The law that entropy always increases -- the second law of
thermodynamics -- holds I think, the supreme position among the laws
of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the
universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations - then so much
worse for Maxwell equations. If it is found to be contradicted by
observation - well these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes.
But if your theory is found to be against the second law of
Thermodynamics, I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to
collapse in deepest humiliation.

Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington, in The Nature of the Physical World.
Maxmillan, New York, 1948, p. 74.
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Entropy. / My opinion /.
« Reply #5 on: 16/04/2008 22:28:52 »
I have received an email ( comment on my article
Entropy / My opinion / ) from " HFAL"
 heronfrancisco@yahoo.com
 " about entropia mail "
 
hi israsad.
 I saw your email and thought very good and important.
 In the formula that s = klogW, you put entropy like energy..
But if you look to the Clausius inequality you see that entropy is energy
divided per temperature.
 So the formula hv = klogW is hv = kT logW I think.
 ............................................
.........................................
HFAL
===========..
My answer:
The formula hv = klogW -->  hv = kT logW
describes the possibility of realization of macro state  from
 micro state. This formula explains the beginning  conditions
 of gravitation, the beginning conditions of star formation.
1.
 hv = klogW.
    hv > kT logW.
    hv < kT.
2.
 hv --> He II --> He I -->
( P. Kapitza , L. Landau , E.L. Andronikashvili theories).
3.
Plasma reaction... -->
4.
Thermonuclear  reactions ...-->......etc.
============..
Best wishes.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8648
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Entropy. / My opinion /.
« Reply #6 on: 17/04/2008 19:21:00 »
S joly well is k ln w.
Always was, always will be. Anything that says otherwise has a problem because it simply won't agree with observations.
My guess is that someone screwed up the algebra somewhere.

BTW, I still don't see you citing any evidence for the second law failing.
Show me an isolated system where delta S is negative.
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Entropy. / My opinion /.
« Reply #7 on: 22/04/2008 11:41:57 »
Two different opinions about Entropy.
===============================
I have received two emails.
1.
 Dear Socratus,
I realize that you sent a brief attempt to describe your search
 for understanding of a difficult subject.

I am knowledgeable about Nonequilibrium Superconductivity
 from my work in the 1970's.  There was a thirty year gap
between my studying Statistical Mechanics in graduate school
and teaching it to upper-level undergraduates.  I am teaching
thermodynamics right now as three chapters of an introductory sequence.
........................................
 ...................................
 With the development of quantum mechanics, we have both theory
 and experiments that show that E=hf is the energy delivered in
 packets by wavelike particles of frequency f. 
(The frequency is often written as "nu" which I take to be your "v".)
This energy is a different kind of quantity than Boltzmann's
expression for the entropy S = k_B log(*Omega*).
You should NOT set them equal. 
E has units of Joules and S has units of Joules/Kelvin.
 (Note the 1/T in the thermodynamic definition of S.)
 Don't try to understand a relationship that is not correct!

B. S.
Professor of Physics
Boston University
 2.
Dear Israel Sadovnik,
..............................................
....................................................
 I am, at this moment, working on a statistical mechanics section of a text.
At the core of this is, of course, the second law.
 I learn more about the second law almost my the day.
I find it particularly distasteful when people try to reduce this
to a statement about the number of quantum states,
 as American advocates of "Thermal Physics" try to.
.....................................
...........................
C. H.                     
Professor of Physics                 
Goshen College
=================....   
I want to explain these two classic opinions.


1.
So,  B. S. says to me:
The solution of entropy (its reversion: when heat can go from
cold to hot )  is only probabilistic/statistical: S= k log W.
Don't try to understand it in another way.
You should NOT set E=hv (E=hf) equal to the klogW.
Don't try to understand a relationship that is not correct!
In another words B. S. says:
 We shall never know what was before: an egg or a hen.
It is only probabilistic/statistical solution.
I don't agree with this opinion. Why?
Take, for example, the " big bang " theory.
According to this theory our Universe exists for 13 ( +)   
billion years. But to create a child from a cell (zigota)
in only 280 days according to probabilistic/statistical
theory is not possible. This process  will take, maybe,
 more then 13 ( +) billion years. So, we can understand
 what  the pregnant woman  was before the " big bang ".  And
 to answer on the question:" what was before: an egg or a hen ?"
we must only look at the beginning, in the Vacuum. 
2.
C. H. hopes that there is a dipper explanation of the Entropy.
My opinion.
In 1915 Einstein has finished his GRT.
In 1916 K. Schwarzschild described gravitational field,
creating with static sphere having constant mass.
In 1963 P. P. Kerr described gravitational field, creating
 with static rotating sphere having constant mass.
In 1965 P.P. Kerr and E.T. Newman described gravitational
 field, creating with static rotating sphere  having constant
mass and electrical charge.
 So, when I put  E=hv  (hf) in the Boltzmann's expression for
 the entropy S = k logW (*Omega*) it is not heretical idea.
So, the relationship between hv (hf) and k logW is possible
and correct.
================...
Questions:
1.
What is heat?
Heat is the collective result of mechanical motion
and friction of all the particles .
This process is described with Boltzmann's
probabilistic /statistical formula: S= k log W.
2.
What produces heat?
The energy E=hv (hf) produces heat, setting in mechanical
 motion and friction  of all particles. This fact is described with
Planck formula:  hv = klogW.
3.
Thanks to Entropy the homogeneous Vacuum is broken.
Thanks to Entropy the micro process changes into
macro process.
Thanks to Entropy the stars formation takes place.
Thanks to Entropy the process of creating elements is take place.
Thanks to Entropy the process of evolution is going.
4.
Why is " The second law of Thermodynamics"
so universal?  Because it is based on
 " The  Law of conservation  and transformation of energy"
And this law is not the simple accounting solution of debit and credit.
 The sense of this law is dipper and it says more than is usually accepted.
========================..
============..
 Best wishes.

 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8648
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Entropy. / My opinion /.
« Reply #8 on: 22/04/2008 20:28:29 »
"What is heat?
Heat is the collective result of mechanical motion
and friction of all the particles .
This process is described with Boltzmann's
probabilistic /statistical formula: S= k log W."
Heat may be many things, but it's not the same as entropy.
In the kinetic theory of gases the particles are generally expected to interact without friction.

While we are at it "Planck formula:  hv = klogW."
Oh no it isn't
h(nu) is a term in energy whereas K ln w is an entropy term (you would need to multiply it by a temperature to get a term in energy)
It makes no more sense than saying the speed of a cricket ball is 3 inches or half a kilo.
Sorry, I'm bored of this so I'm not going to point out the other errors.
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Entropy. / My opinion /.
« Reply #9 on: 23/04/2008 05:55:40 »
While we are at it "Planck formula:  hv = klogW."
Oh no it isn't
h(nu) is a term in energy whereas K ln w is an entropy term (you would need to multiply it by a temperature to get a term in energy)
===================================
...if you look to the Clausius inequality you see that entropy
 is energy divided per temperature.
 So the formula hv = klogW  is  hv = kT logW   I think.
       / HFAL/


 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8648
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Entropy. / My opinion /.
« Reply #10 on: 23/04/2008 19:25:06 »
That's exactly what I said.
I just wonder why you didn't get it right the first time.
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Entropy. / My opinion /.
« Reply #11 on: 23/04/2008 19:38:16 »
That's exactly what I said.
I just wonder why you didn't get it right the first time.

======================================================
It is hard to go from the darkness to the light.

 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Entropy. / My opinion /.
« Reply #12 on: 24/04/2008 05:20:28 »
Thanks to: " HFAL", " Bored chemist", Bill Skocpol and Jim Whitescarver
I corrected and wrote this article.

 Entropy. / My opinion /.
=======...
1.   
Henry Poincare  named the conception of "entropy "
as a " surprising abstract ".
2.
 Lev  Landau (Dau) wrote:
" A question about the physical basis of the
entropy monotonous  increasing law remains open ". 
3.
The famous mathematician  John von Neumann said to
"the father of information theory" Claude Shannon:
 " Name it "entropy"  then in discussions
 you will receive solid advantage, because
nobody knows, what "entropy"  basically is ".
=============..
1.
Between 1850 - 1865 Rudolf Clausius published a paper
 in which  he called " The energy conservation law" as
 " The first law  of  thermodynamics". But in our nature the
 heat always flows  from the higher temperature to the
 lower one and never back.  In our everyday life we don't see
 the heat itself rises from cold to hot. So, it seemed  that
 in thermodynamics " The energy  conservation law"
wasn’t  kept, this law was broken. But Clausius had another
opinion. He thought: I know people believe  that this process is
irreversible, but I am sure that " The energy conservation  law"
 is universal law and it must be correct also for thermodynamic
process. So, how can I save this law ?
Probably, in the thermodynamic process  there is something
 that we don't  know. Maybe, there is some degradation
 of the total energy in the system which never disappears .
Perhaps, there is some non-useful heat, some unseen process ,
some unknown  dark energy , some  another form of potential
 energy/heat itself which can  transform  heat  from the cold
 body to the warm one. I will call  this conception as " entropy"
 and as it is not a law  I take it as " The second  principle
 of thermodynamics " which says that " the entropy of an isolated
system always increases ". Another version: " No process is possible
 in which the  only result is the transfer   of heat from a hotter to a
colder body.  It is possible some reversible process which is
 unknown now ."
2.
Between 1870 - 1880  Ludwig  Boltzmann said:
" Clausius is right. But I can add more to his entropy conception.
First.
According to Classic physics when an isolated thermodynamic
 system comes to a thermal equilibrium all particles stop their
 moving. From one hand it is correct. But the system cannot be
 at thermal equilibrium (in the state of thermo death) all the time.
 The situation in the system must change.
Therefore I say  that at the thermal equilibrium  the entropy
(some unknown dark/potential energy ) of the system will
reach maximum and as a result , the thermal  equilibrium
 of the system will change.
Second.
I don't know how exactly  the  thermal  equilibrium of the system
 changes. But I can give  probabilistic / statistical interpretation
of this changing process.  I can write " The second principle of
 thermodynamics" by a formula: S= k log W and this formula
says:" the entropy ( heat) of the system is the collective result of
mechanical motion and  friction of all the particles (k)."
I will call it as " The second law of Thermodynamics."
3
In 1900 Max Planck said:
Clausius and Boltzmann are both right.
But all my life I worked almost exclusively on problems
 related to thermodynamics. And I am sure that the " The second
 law of Thermodynamics" , concerning entropy, is deeper and it
 says more than is generally accepted. I am sure the Boltzmann's
probabilistic /statistical version of "The second law of
Thermodynamics "  is not  completed, is not final.
Please, look at the graph of the radiation curves of the " black body".
They are very similar to those curves which are calculated
by Maxwell for the velocity (i.e. energy)  distribution of gas
molecules in a closed container. Could this black body radiation
problem be studied in the same way as Maxwell's ideal gas....
...electromagnetic waves ? This problem of connection  between
radiation of black body and Maxwell's Electrodynamics theory
doesn't give me peace. Maxwell's theory can tell everything
about the emission, absorption and propagation of the radiation,
 but nothing about the energy distribution at thermal
equilibrium. What to do? How to be ?
After trying every possible approach using traditional
classical applications of the laws of thermodynamics
I was desperated. And I was forced to consider that the
relation between entropy, Boltzmann's  probability version
and Maxwell's theory  is possible to solve by suggestion ,
 that  energy is radiated and absorbed with discrete
  individual  quanta particle (E= hv). So, now I must write
 " The second law of Thermodynamics " by formula:
                          hv = k log W.
But if I look to the Clausius inequality I see that entropy
 is energy divided per temperature.
 So the formula hv = klogW is  hv = kT logW  I think.

 I was so surprised and sceptical of such interpretation  the
 entropy  that  I spent years trying to explain this result
in another , less revolutionary way. It was difficult for me
 to accept this formula and to understand it essence .
It was hard for me to believe in my own discovery.
 ==================..
My conclusion.
How to understand this formula?
Which process does formula (hv = kT logW ) describe ?
1.
In 1877  Boltzmann suggested that the energy/mass state
of a physical system (of ideal gas ) could be discreted.
 This idea was written with formula: R/N=k. It means:
 there are particles with energy/mass state (k) in physical
system of ideal gas  . They dont move, they are in the
 state of rest.
2.
 In 1900 Planck followed Boltzmann's  method of dividing.
Planck suggested that energy was radiated and absorbed
with  discrete "energy elements" - " quantum of energy"-
- " Planck's action constant"- (h) . This fact means:
electron produces heat, setting in mechanical motion and
 friction  all particles. This fact is described with Planck's
 formula:   hv = kTlogW.
3.
In which reference frame does this process take place?
In thermodynamical reference frame of ideal gas and
black body (M. Laue called this model as Kirchhoff,s vacuum).
Now it is considered that these models  are abstract ones which
do not exist in nature. On my opinion  these models explain
  the situation in the real Vacuum (T=0K) very well.
4.
 For my opinion the formula (hv = kT logW ) says:
a)
The reason of " entropy" , the source of thermal equilibrium's
fluctuation , the source of Vacuum fluctuation is an action of
the particle /electron, which  has energy: E = hv  (hf).
b)
The process of Vacuum fluctuation depends on collective
motions of all particles (k) and will be successful if enough
 statistical  quantity of Boltzmann's  particles ( kT logW)
 surround the electron.
c)
Which process does the formula (hv = kT logW ) say about ?
This formula describes the possibility of realization of
macro state from micro state. This formula explains
the beginning conditions of gravitation,
the beginning conditions of star formation.
1.
 hv = kT logW.
    hv > kT logW.
    hv < kT.
2.
 hv --> He II --> He I -->
( P. Kapitza , L. Landau , E.L. Andronikashvili theories).
(Superconductivity,  superfluidity.)
 3.
Plasma reaction... -->
4.
Thermonuclear  reactions ...-->......etc.

d)
Thanks to Entropy the homogeneous Vacuum is broken.
Thanks to Entropy the micro process changes into
macro process.
Thanks to Entropy the stars formation takes place.
Thanks to Entropy " the ultraviolet catastrophe" is absent.
Thanks to Entropy our Milky Way doesn't change into radiation. 
Thanks to Entropy the process of creating elements takes place.
Thanks to Entropy the process of evolution is going.
e)
One physicist  said :" The entropy is only a shadow of energy“.
Maybe now somebody can understand  why  entropy is a shadow.
And maybe now somebody will understand why
" The  Law of conservation  and transformation of energy"
 is also correct for thermodynamic system.
f)
Why is " The second law of Thermodynamics"
so universal?  Because it is based on
 " The  Law of conservation  and transformation of energy"
And this law is not the simple accounting solution of debit and credit.
 The sense of this law is dipper and it says more than is usually accepted.
===========..
P.S.
 It took me about three months to write this brief article.
Plus about three years searching for the key of entropy problem.
Plus about twenty-three years trying to understand the essence
of physical laws and formulas.
==============.. 
  Best wishes.
Israel Socratus.
===========================================
 # [A law] is more impressive the greater the simplicity of its
premises, the more different are the kinds of things it relates, and
the more extended its range of applicability. Therefore, the deep
impression which classical thermodynamics made on me. It is the only
physical theory of universal content, which I am convinced, that
within the framework of applicability of its basic concepts will never
be overthrown.
/ Albert Einstein/

# The law that entropy always increases -- the second law of
thermodynamics -- holds I think, the supreme position among the laws
of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the
universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations - then so much
worse for Maxwell equations. If it is found to be contradicted by
observation - well these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes.
But if your theory is found to be against the second law of
Thermodynamics, I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to
collapse in deepest humiliation.
/ Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington /
============================...
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Entropy. / My opinion /.
« Reply #12 on: 24/04/2008 05:20:28 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums