The entropy of systems

Here is one definition which relates mechanical work and thermodynamics:

"In thermodynamics, work is the quantity of energy transferred from one system to another without an accompanying transfer of entropy. It is a generalization of the concept of mechanical work in mechanics. In the SI system of measurement, work is measured in joules (symbol: J). The rate at which work is performed is power."

I think they have the entropy part wrong....

So then: <i>Forces caused by energy transfer cause work (+ energy loss)</i>.

this should hold true for physics, chemistry, biology,....

What do you think Jim ?

Gd, Great research on your part reguarding how things are defined. Entrophy is an engineering tool that works very well for thermal processes. This holds true for chemistry, mechanics and all other fields effected in any way by thermal processes. The thing is energy also effects processes that are not thermal like light, x-ray and gamma processes. The problem arises when thermal laws are used to describe nonthermal processes. For example, stars are not thermal but astronmy uses thermal laws to describe stars. Nuclear events are not thermal but they are described using thermal laws. It would be a good thing if energy was understood to be more than thermal and the excellent thermal laws were confined to events that really are thermal. This would include the fact that entrophy is an invention and not a property ruling the universe.

Jim,

What is heat?

Is this the only thing which keeps this theory from being correct?

Heat is one of many reactions observed when matter and energy interact. It has been defined as the random motion of molecules which seems about right but not very satisifying because how heat is generated by the interaction of matter and energy is never explained in the definition. How matter absorbs energy and develop motion in the process is observed but never explained. And when the random motion is transfered from place to place by any of several processes the result can be predicted but its never explained how the transfer is done. This might be because the result was all that matters to anyone-who cares how it is done when you can use the result?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />Heat is one of many reactions observed when matter and energy interact. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Jim, in your statement above, where do you think energy comes from?
Could energy come from matter itself? Could this explain Brownian motion for example? (also: tornadoes, hurricanes,... etc.)
According to me,these are perfect examples of thermal process with entropy. (some energy goes back to the environment, but certainly some energy loss also)
The thing I have been insisting on is: irreversible energy loss from matter which is not reusable for work (heat... or maybe what some call: dark energy).

Jim,

Would symmetry breaking be an indication of an entropy increasing environment?

(I found this example for symmetry breaking: -"A common example to help explain this phenomenon is a ball sitting on top of a hill. This ball is in a completely symmetric state. However, its state is unstable: the slightest perturbing force will cause the ball to roll down the hill in some particular direction. At that point, symmetry has been broken because the direction in which the ball rolled has a feature that distinguishes it from all other directions.")

When we think about it, this example is wrong since symmetry breaking has already occurred even before the ball starts rolling: gravity is acting upon it.