Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
-snipped
The entropy has been shown to be a measure of uncertainty, indeed, and I'm
pleased to see David using that term in preference to the odious "disorder".
It is, however, a measure of uncertainty at *all* scales of length, not only
the submicroscopic. Uncertainty is also related to timescale, by the way, a
fact both David and I have swept under the rug to this point. The
uncertainty in the order of a pack of cards is zero once it has been
isolated from a source of shuffling; that is why the entropy contribution
due to any particualr order is the same: zero. In the limit of incredibly
long times one could fancifully imagine that cards could change places, say
by quantum mechanical tunneling, and that would increase the "uncertainty".
The order of an initially arranged pack would be as uncertain as that of an
initially shuffled pack, however; the entropy increase due to consideration
on an incredibly long time scale would be the same for both cases (and
negligible compared to other terms, including the amplitude of the expected
entropy fluctuations).