The entropy of systems

That's fine. I have a copy. And it saves me the trouble (of pushing a button). All posters have the power to edit their own stuff.

===

Ahem. Equilibrium: (noun) ... ???

LB

I have decided that I will stop blocking you.

If you really don't want to say what you mean by equilibrium, then don't.

LB

Larry and GD. I have decided to define Equilibrium in the context of the German Viking Heavy Metal Band Equilibrium, althought I personally enjoyed Bathory back in the day.

GD, equilibrium is just a balance in phenomena and that balance can be affected by anything. The balance can remain for a few seconds or a few minutes or for epochs. In the case of my battery example, notice that a car has an alternator that replaces charge taken from the battery. All equilibrium systems must be subject to a definition statement. For the car battery here is mine -> A properly functional battery will remain at the equilibrium state of 12-14 volts. In my statement have implied eternity to the system? No, I have not. In essence you are wanting to say that no equilibriums exist. This is untrue because examples of equilibriums in many different time scales are observed. Your body pH will remain in equilibrium until you draw your last breath. Another example, the water cycle on earth. Sun's heat causes evaporation, then condensation occurs, then precipitation, then evaporation, etc. Has this been in a balance for a long time, I think anyone would agree yes. Does this mean the balance point can't be shifted? A lesson in chemical kinetics will immediatedly answer that. Sure!
I just think that you are not giving an adequate description of what you mean. You are not being attacked, just vague. mark

Here is my definition:

<b>equilibrium is said of a system which is not subjected to acceleration. Its entropy (system) remains constant, and its physical properties are not influenced by position nor time.</b>

I have read that Einstein once stated that his Theory of Relativity could be renamed: "Theory of Invariance" because as one could assume: physical properties remains constant in all reference frames (or inertial frames).

This is WRONG (I have to be convincing to prove my point), he meant MAN MADE reference frames: ship with ref. to sea or shore, train with ref. to ground, elevator with ref. to building, etc...

Nature does not behave this way: there are no rockets, engines and so forth to make matter accelerate.

If matter accelerates, it is because there is an imbalance in this system. Therefore physical properties do change in time (long, long looonnnggg time!!! for a system such as the Earth for example.)

You guys are right: this thread is way too long!
If it takes more and more time for me to answer these posts, it is for a few reasons:

1) I am starting to get in more and more disputes with my wife because I stay too long in front of this GD computer. (yes, you now know what GD stands for).

2) My brain is slowly turning to jelly because of the radiation coming off that screen.

3) This subject has a repulsion effect on my system.

So lets try to end this chatting by saying that this theory could possibly be true before I end up with a divorce, glowing neurons, or a white suit with no tie. I have a life to live!

(Larry: if I deleted comments, it is for that reason: for no one to see.)

GD

Thanks GD

Mark Vitrone

GD_equilibrium:

"equilibrium is said of a system which is not subjected to acceleration. Its entropy (system) remains constant, and its physical properties are not influenced by position nor time."

===

What, in your opinion, is the most important difference between your definition of equilibrium and any of the standard dictionary definitions? You can select any dictionary you like for comparison, but please specify which one you select.

LB