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] |
I know this isn't supposed to break down into a matter of definitions/
semantics etc. - but I gotta ask.
JD uses 'Equilibrium' as the Subject and 'explains' what he calls
'Thermal Equilibrium' so I have to 'assume' that Jack's reference to
'non-equilibrium' is related to the TINY number of things in A
compared to the HUMONGOUS number of things in B. Is it this disparity
of number that makes it 'non-equilibrium' in some sense??
I ask - because it may help me in formulating a serious 'entropy'
question that I have been mulling for years - interest in which has
been renewed by Leigh's recent comments on the shuffled card deck.
Thanks for any clarifications that might be forthcoming.
At 3:33 PM -0500 4/20/10, Jack Uretsky wrote:
Hi all-
To the extent that this is a non-equjilibrium situation,
<snip>
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010, John Denker wrote:
<snip>
>
> We let the system sit for a long time, so that it
> reaches its maximum entropy macrostate. This is what
> I call thermal equilibrium, although I don't want to
> argue about definitions.
<snip>
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l