<div dir="ltr"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">---------- Forwarded message ---------<br>From: <strong class="gmail_sendername" dir="auto">Stanley N Salthe</strong> <span dir="auto"><<a href="mailto:ssalthe@binghamton.edu">ssalthe@binghamton.edu</a>></span><br>Date: Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:52 AM<br>Subject: Re: [External Email] Energy and Entropy<br>To: Marcus Abundis <<a href="mailto:55mrcs@gmail.com">55mrcs@gmail.com</a>><br></div><br><br><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">
<p><span>Since Marcus has ignored Pedro’s request to keep entropy discussion offline, I will answer Marcus online Following his example:</span></p><p><span style="line-height:1.5">Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 11:57 AM Marcus Abundis <</span><a href="mailto:55mrcs@gmail.com" style="line-height:1.5" target="_blank"><span>55mrcs@gmail.com</span></a><span style="line-height:1.5">> wrote:</span></p><p><span></span></p>
<p><span style="line-height:1.5">Marcus – I am sorry if my notes still seem unclear to you. I was attempting a more civil tone in my replies, something better than your 'Your statement concerning "typify" is nonsense.' Perhaps this weakened my point. For example, if you go to Scholarpedia and search entropy you will find seven types of entropy listed – entropy is 'typified' in (at least) seven different ways. Your note 'Entropy applies everywhere, and always in the same way.', even as something 'formal only' is actually nonsense, failing to recognize the current state of affairs.</span><br><span></span></p>
<p><span> S: You have misread me. Your many “different types of entropy” are different manifestations of the same natural tendency/phenomenon in different systems. The formal structure of that tendency could be said to be ‘scatter’ or ‘dispersion’. This manifests differently in different kinds of systems that may be of great interest to the specialists in those systems.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height:1.5">Marcus -- Further, entropy is always 'driven' by something, making force-energy a directly related concept.</span><br><span></span></p>
<p><span> S: Yes, a general term for this is ‘work’, the utilization of energy gradient </span></p>
<p><span style="line-height:1.5">Marcus -- Thus, *just in physics* (ignoring other areas of research) with the uncertain nature of force-energy entropy is equally uncertain. Your assertion on physics equally failed to recognize the current state of affairs in physics.</span><br><span></span></p>
<p><span> S: If any of these specializations fail to be based on the underlying process of energy loss during work, I should like to be advised about it.</span></p>
<p><span>STAN</span></p> <br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 12:22 AM Marcus Abundis <<a href="mailto:55mrcs@gmail.com" target="_blank">55mrcs@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Karl – it was no rhetorical embellishment . . . <div>If you go to Wikipedia and search 'energy' you will find 12 forms listed there. At other times I have seen as many as 16 listed, this listing changes from time to time. If you go to Scholarpedia and search energy, you will find NO entries. Scholarpedia is more rigorous in reviewing and admitting material. If you go to the US Energy Information Agency (<a href="http://aie.gov" target="_blank">aie.gov</a>) you will see 9 forms listed. Most sites make vague references to 'many forms of energy exist, some of which are . . . ' Still, this means there is no firm scientific framing for 'energy'. </div><div><br></div><div>Stan – I am sorry if my notes still seem unclear to you. I was attempting a more civil tone in my replies, something better than your 'Your statement concerning "typify" is nonsense.' Perhaps this weakened my point. For example, if you go to Scholarpedia and search entropy you will find seven types of entropy listed – entropy is 'typified' in (at least) seven different ways. Your note 'Entropy applies everywhere, and always in the same way.', even as something 'formal only' is actually nonsense, failing to recognize the current state of affairs.</div><div><br></div><div>Further, entropy is always 'driven' by something, making force-energy a directly related concept. Thus, *just in physics* (ignoring other areas of research) with the uncertain nature of force-energy entropy is equally uncertain. Your assertion on physics equally failed to recognize the current state of affairs in physics.</div><div><br></div><div>That said, I still hope to see more notes from our featured New Year's speaker . . . </div><div><br></div><div>Marcus</div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div>
</div></div>