Posted: Jun 16, 2019 3:24 pm
romansh wrote:Cito di Pense wrote:romansh wrote:It's got nothing to do with order or disorder.
Irreversibility has to do with order, and so, with probabilities. Entropy is defined in terms of probabilities, and that's why we have crank postings about entropy by socratus, who is probably some kind of determinist. But only probably.
So what is the probability of having a particular order of a shuffled set of cards? Is not entropy a reflection of the number of ways a system can be shuffled rather than what is the probability of any order of that system?
Do you disagree with Lambert (my attachment) pages six and seven?
What particular statement are you asking me to agree or disagree with? I don't have the desire to read a verbose non-technical treatment of people's non-technical misunderstandings of entropy.
Lambert is presenting entropy by skirting any discussion of the partition function. He discusses entropy in terms of dispersal of energy rather than partitioning. Relative to the audience he's trying to reach, his treatment isn't wrong, but he spends a lot of pages to say very little, and what he writes has a great deal to do with his own idiosyncrasies, i.e. his presumed orientation toward kinetics, his "Why don't things go wrong more often?" I think he needs to update his treatment in light of new data.
Lambert spends a lot of words to say whatever it is he's saying. What do you think he's saying? As usual, you cite a web page and seem to think you're done.