meta user
network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | ||
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 1 year, 4 months |
| seen | Dec 15 '12 at 1:59 | |
| stats | profile views | 82 |
|
Jan 22 |
awarded | Yearling |
|
Aug 13 |
comment |
Does the scientific community consider the Loschmidt paradox resolved? If so what is the resolution? Could you please illustrate or point to the specific derivation/formulae which show that "its solution depends exponientally on the initials conditions."? |
|
Jan 31 |
comment |
Chance of objects going against greater entropy Well, Landauer's principle may interest you |
|
Jan 27 |
awarded | Revival |
|
Jan 26 |
comment |
Deterministic quantum mechanics no probability no |
|
Jan 26 |
awarded | Critic |
|
Jan 26 |
comment |
Is there a universal rest frame of reference? you probably mean ... a unique rest frame ... |
|
Jan 26 |
comment |
Is there a universal rest frame of reference? actually, you are moving 99% of c in some reference frame |
|
Jan 26 |
revised |
How are particle simplices associated into complex particles? prettyfied latex |
|
Jan 26 |
comment |
How are particle simplices associated into complex particles? thanks, I tried to look up before, but I couldnt identify what engine was used and what environment I needed... |
|
Jan 26 |
comment |
How are particle simplices associated into complex particles? ah its latex then? |
|
Jan 26 |
comment |
Chance of objects going against greater entropy (his question doesnt seem to refer to probability of strange events where wavefunction is small but nonzero in quantum mechanics, but to small probabilities in statistical mechanics) |
|
Jan 26 |
comment |
Chance of objects going against greater entropy The logarithmic measure of multiplicity is but one of many equivalent definitions of entropy: when multiplicities are unavailable S[X]=-\int P(X=x)*ln(P(X=x)) dx. Apply to microscopic probability distribution and you get traditional entropy which tends to increase over time, but calculate entropy on macroscopic probability distribution and this will tend to decrease over time... |
|
Jan 25 |
comment |
The Sun Can Make Stuff Hotter Than Itself but then how come farts (pretty cold with respect to the flame) heat flames? |
|
Jan 25 |
comment |
Chance of objects going against greater entropy or in short: microscopic entropy increases, macroscopic entropy decreases. BTW since life rests on making things more certain (i.e. the probability of having 2 legs should be much higher than other amounts of legs) macroscopic decrease of entropy is necessary, and hence microscopic increase of entropy is necessary... |
|
Jan 25 |
answered | Chance of objects going against greater entropy |
|
Jan 25 |
comment |
Does the scientific community consider the Loschmidt paradox resolved? If so what is the resolution? actually I had already voted you up because: the second bullet looks a lot like a different interpretation of what I have in mind, and because it is a summary of what different directions the scientific community explores on the topic, which was part of the question |
|
Jan 25 |
comment |
spacetime or only space? also since you seem extatic about the geometric interpretation of what you actually already algebraically knew (I guess you are already way past height of a falling ball in function of time etc...) you may enjoy looking up Geometric Algebra, which adds significant interpretation to spatial mathematics... (some of the things defined you probably already know, but these texts tend to explicitly point out the geometric significance, for those things you already knew you would gain no calculative powers, only notational and interpretational coherence, of course youll benefit the new mathematics) |
|
Jan 25 |
comment |
spacetime or only space? dont be surprised with how people here will treat your questions if they consider it extremely obvious or a prerequisite to physics.stackexchange... |
|
Jan 25 |
comment |
spacetime or only space? In other words, and ignoring your remarks about energy, biology, organisms and efficiency, it looks like you just made the transition from [seeing say the movement of a falling ball as a spatial vector position in function of time] to [adding geometric interpretation of time by realizing that time t can be seen as an added dimension to space]. In other words from using elements of {f| f: R->R^3} to structures defined on R^3xR or R^4... which is good for you, but most of us will feel like "been there done that, in elementary school". |
