The entropy of systems

[GD] " ... I never thought we were so far apart in this thinking process."

But it was obvious to us. That is why we are trying to get you to learn some basic physics.

[GD] "I still don't think today's definitions in physics properly describe our universe? (... physical anomalies, dark energy, dark matter, eleven dimension universe, etc...)"

We also think that there are problems (some serious) with mainstream science. The difference is that we understand the basics and have at least a chance of finding better answers.

[GD] "I wasn't able to communicate properly my views on this subject."

Prediction - you will continue to have this problem until you learn the basics.

[GD] "I'm going to need more time..."

Suggestion - a good starting point would be to Google on "dimensional analysis" and spend some time reading and absorbing. Then come back in a few days and ask questions if you need to.



LB

You will have to notice in most definitions, the terms: "could be", "may be" etc. are used because of an unclear concept such as entropy.

Larry,

Would you say that the definition in the following link is right or wrong?
Are they saying there is a relationship between temperature, entropy, and energy?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_temperature

Please go to -Derivations of thermodynamic temperature.

"... the thermodynamic temperature is the rate increase of entropy with energy."

I must have misunderstood something there also. Please correct me if I am wrong.

So the only divergence we have is the following: what is temperature.
I say: energy released by the atom
you say: energy released from the collision between atoms.

I say: Varying energy is sufficient to provide a force.
you say: a force is required to move an object.

What would come first: the motion of the atom or the collision?

In the universe, what comes first: the motion or the collision?

Hmmm. Looks like my prediction was right.

===

I see no problem with Wikipedia's definition, but you misquoted it and changed it's meaning. If you understood the basics you could have avoided yet another mistake.

[GD] I say temperature is energy released by the atom.

You are correct. (This is in fact what you say.)

[GD] You say temperature is energy released from the the collision between atoms.

You are wrong. (We say temperature is a measure of the average kinetic energy of the atoms and/or molecules in a wad of stuff.)

* Collisions may or may not be involved, but if they are they do not change the temperature of the wad.

* Temperature is not defined for a single atom; the kinetic energy of a single atom is interpreted as speed rather than as temperature.

[GD] What would come first: the motion ... or the collision?

This is a trick question, right?

LB

Why do you resist learning some simple physics? It isn't very hard, and then you could stop beating your head against that wall (which is probably quite hard).

LB

Suppose it turns out that you actually have some insight into the workings of nature that everyone else has missed? If you do not learn how to talk to us, that insight will be lost when you die.

It is your sacred duty, as a loyal human being, to expend whatever effort is necessary to get that information to us in a way that we can understand.

LB

Larry:
"You are wrong. (We say temperature is a measure of the average kinetic energy of the atoms and/or molecules in a wad of stuff.)"

GD:
We are almost saying the same thing...
Kinetic energy is energy of motion (all I am saying is this motion is achieved at the expense of energy)

Larry:
"* Collisions may or may not be involved, but if they are they do not change the temperature of the wad."
GD:
I disagree.

Larry:
"* Temperature is not defined for a single atom; the kinetic energy of a single atom is interpreted as speed rather than as temperature."
GD:
I disagree also. For the non-equilibrium theory to be true, your definition of temperature is wrong.



GD:
What have you to say about : varying the energy level of a mass produces a force. Do you agree or not?

(Larry, I am trying to get you to say something which would agree with this theory. I think it is the only way we can communicate.)
Is this o.k. with you?
(I can't rely too much on the basics, this is what I am trying to change.)