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] |
Dan says (and I omit much I do not choose to argue further)...:
The time-dependent Schrodinger equation is fully
deterministic and allows one to predict a future state with precision,
provided that the initial state is also known with precision.
In any case, the issue of quantum indeterminacy surely is not
relevant to understanding entropy. (If you think it is relevant,
then please elaborate.)
It is certainly relevant. It is a cognitive error to believe that
any fully deterministic equation describes Nature in a valid
fashion when applied to predicting the future over the timescales
I mentioned. That view has not been responsibly held by anyone
since early in this century. Perhaps Creationists still hold to a
Cartesian world view, but no serious physicists do. What we are
discussing here is the description of the real world; physics is
the topic at hand, not epistemology. Clearly quantum indeterminacy
is central to microscopic interpretation of thermodynamics.
My point is not that we should rely on authority, only
that intelligent people who have thought very carefully about entropy
are *not* in agreement over whether it is objective or subjective.
So let's be a little more polite to each other, ok?
I'm sorry if I seem impolite, but you seem obtuse. How can you
possibly challenge the authoritative view of entropy when it is
a definition!?* The postmodernists may believe that entropy is
a mutable thing, but I really don't want to participate in the
committee that redefines it.
Did these other intelligent people reflect at liesure or did
you badger them like you seem to enjoy badgering me? Or do I
not qualify as an intelligent person? I give up; you win. The
entropy is a subjective quantity. (Eppur si muove.)
Will someone else please chime in here? A voice of sanity?
Would you insert comments about the
subjective nature of entropy into such a course? I'll wager that
the texts cited here would not support your view.